“Perhaps it will not
be apparent to many... that what we have here is the Mother Lode of authentic
Sufism.”

From the Preface

With simplicity,
clarity and wisdom, this anthology covers the major aspects of Sufism. At the
same time, it comprises a fresh and refreshing vision of the Islamic religion.
The author opens a window onto the teachings of Master Ahmet Kayhan, who guides
us through a copious garden in which everyone will find what he needs—or at
least, something akin to it. On each visit to this market-place, you will
discover something new and exciting. In addition, it provides a rare glimpse of
Islam as it should really be lived. For anyone interested in spiritual growth,
religion, or mysticism, this book is a must.

WARNING: A CALL TO PEACE................................................... 142

PREFACE

This book started out as a translation of the
Turkish book named Body and Spirit,
by the renowned Sufi Master Ahmet Kayhan—

—And right here at the very beginning, we
encounter our first difficulty, one of many to be addressed in this book. Mr.
Ahmet Kayhan defies description or any simple categorization. Part of the
problem arises from the definition of the words “Sufism” and “Islam,” and the
conceptions these give rise to in people’s minds. “Sufism” has come to be
understood in a variety of ways. Properly, it is the esoteric aspect, the
highest expression, of Islam. Yet it cannot be divorced and considered in
isolation from the exoteric aspect: the former is the content and the latter is
the form which contains it.

In the case of the term “Islam,” the problem is
compounded to such a degree that it becomes almost impossible to solve. The
word has become associated with so many connotations that different people
using the same term rarely mean the same thing. One thing is clear: what you understand from the word is almost
certainly not what “Islam” really means. This holds no less true for a
majority of Moslems than for non-Moslems. Given the sorry state of religious
instruction in so-called “Islamic” countries, few Moslems really know what our
religion is all about. Even fewer are able to practice it properly, and the
failings of the majority in this respect are responsible for most of the
misconceptions. If this is the case even with Moslems, think what the situation
must be for non-Moslems. This book aims to disabuse readers from such
misunderstandings, and it is hoped that by the time you finish it, you will
have gained a more accurate impression of what “Sufism” and “Islam” really
mean.

Professor Aydin Ungan spent a year or two on
the translation of the book, and I would here like to express our gratitude to
him for all his efforts.

The translation finally arrived in my hands in
a semi finished state. Nevertheless, I started work thinking that only a little
polishing would be necessary.

The more I applied myself to the task, however,
the less tenable it became to remain content with a rote translation. For one
thing, the anthology did not proceed in linear sequential order; it presumed a
certain amount of knowledge concerning Islam and Sufism in the reader, and a
relatively simple chapter might, for example, be preceded by a difficult one.
This knowledge could not be taken for granted in the average Western reader.
Hence new, introductory chapters had to be written that incorporated material
dispersed throughout the Master’s books and talks.

The result is a book that evolved from Body and Spirit, and is not a direct
translation. I, of course, must bear responsibility for all its failures. Yet
it is also to be hoped that the reader will find it not entirely lacking in
appeal, and in lieu of this I would like to say a few words about my main
concerns in preparing it.

1. Universality.

Islam is a universal religion, a religion for
all humanity; it always has been. The original book assumed an Islamic cultural
background in its readers. From the start,
Islam has found roots predominantly in the Middle East, and naturally it has
been imbued with the culture of that region. Islamic peoples have been quite
content with this situation; they are satisfied with it and have found no
reason to contest it. But a Western reader may rightly wonder how Islam can be
called universal if no way can be found to relate it to his own cultural background.

Western culture is based on the
Judaeo-Christian tradition, and Islam has so much in common with Judaism and
Christianity that there should be no reason why Western readers should find
themselves unable to relate to it. Hence, I have interspersed the text with
quotations from Western sources wherever an affinity suggested itself. These
are mostly absent from the original book, but I hope the general readership
will find the book more accessible and appealing in its present form. Being a
universal religion, Islam has expressed universal truths, and some of these truths
have been the property of the Western religious and intellectual tradition as
well. Wherever a Western source is referred to, therefore, it should be noted
that Islam in most cases already contains that truth quite independently, and
the reference is given only in order to ease the reader’s comprehension.

A Sufi teaching-story told by Rumi beautifully
illustrates this point. A Greek, an Arab, a Turk and a Persian once came
together, and when they were hungry they pooled their money to buy something to
eat. At that point a difficulty arose, however, because the Greek wanted to buy
stafil, the Arab wanted to buy inab, the Persian wanted angur while the Turk wanted uzum. They finally began to quarrel, and
at that moment a wise sage passing by interrupted them. “Tell me what you
want,” he said, and taking the money from them, soon came back with some
grapes. They were amazed to see that they all had wanted the same thing. So it
is with human beings everywhere: although we all fundamentally want the same
things, we call them by different names, and in doing so imagine they are
different.

Well, then, here are the grapes.

2. Unification.

As will be discussed in this book, Islam is the
religion of unification. At the most immediate level, of course, this refers to
the fact that God is One. Yet there are other dimensions to it. Ideally, Islam
aims to unite science, philosophy, religion and art—no field of human knowledge
or perception lies outside its ken. The “grand synthesis” which some have aimed
at but failed to achieve because they weren’t looking in the right place can
only be achieved within the purvey of Islam.

Mathematics has been called the queen of
sciences, and in a similar vein it may be said that Islam is the crown of
religions. The true facets of all religions—and they all contain truth, even
the most unexpected—are proper subsets of Islam. Hence, in order to help the
reader, I have attempted to show parallels with other religions where these
exist.

And finally, Islam ideally aims to unite all
humanity. I find it unnecessary to labor the importance of this point in the “global village” we inhabit today.

A portion of Professor Ungan’s original preface
is included here for its flavor and human interest:

My involvement with the translation of this
book was not as subtle as Master Ahmet Kayhan’s personality, yet the beginning
was interesting, and I could not pass without sharing it with you first.

Since my childhood, I have always been
fascinated with the Sufis; their literature, philosophy, knowledge, comprehension,
intuitive power, synthesis, tranquillity, poetry and mystical music. Since, in
the later years of my life, I started living in the United States, I made the
reading of Sufi literature in English a habit in my free time. However, I had
very little personal contact with actual Sufis.

On one of my visits to my native country,
Turkey, I had a chance to visit the Master’s house. It was in Ankara, a crowded
top-floor flat open to everybody who seeks his wisdom and advice, which are
freely dispensed. When we knocked on the door, we were welcomed and asked to
come in without any questions. In the living room, the Master was talking to
two women, and there were several men sitting on the couches. After finishing
his words, the Master showed us our seats, talked with my friends for a while,
and gave some advice.

At one point he looked at me and said: “Oh, we
forgot you... Who are you descended from?” I told him my father’s name. The
Master turned his head, looked at my friend, Sadettin, and asked: “Do we know
him?” Sadettin replied: “Not likely,” and added that I lived in the States. I
affirmed that he would not know of my father since he had passed away years
ago, and added: “Ten years ago, I came and visited you here.” He replied:
“Oh... you came back so soon,” with a playful smile on his face. In order to
change the subject, I quickly thought of saying: “I am reading the works of Ibn
Arabi.” The Master closed his eyes for a moment, and
said: “You should not start building a house from the
roof. What happens to a building without a foundation? It collapses.”

He again closed his eyes for a moment, and
continued: “God Almighty has given two things into the hands of human beings.
On the one hand we have fire, and on the other, water. You cannot contain fire;
cannot put it anywhere, cannot give it to a child... So, be careful with it.
However, you can put water into any cup. You can give it to a child. You can
give life, comfort, and peace with it. Therefore, use water.” After finishing
his words, he waited for a while, and from the next room he called in his
son-in-law. He asked him to find the original version of this book and to read
the first section in the preface aloud. While he was reading, the Master was
reaffirming the sentences and looking at me to make sure that I understood.
After it was finished, he asked: “What is your name?” I replied: “Aydin,” which
means “enlightened” in Turkish. The Master said: “That’s a nice name. Very
well, then, take this book and translate it into English.” After giving me some
literature on the Sufism, some in English, some in Turkish, he added:
“Enlighten all around.”

I knew right away then that my contribution to
the efforts of this enlightenment process would be less than minimal, since I
was myself in search of enlightenment by the Master and other Sufis. Compared
with their functions and comprehension of this world, I felt very small.

However, after returning to the States, I felt
a strong urge to comply with the Master’s request. By translating his book, I
wanted to take a part, however negligible, in his process of “giving to the
world.” Right after the start, I quickly found out how
the Master was right about his comment on my reading. This book fortified the
foundation I needed for further attempts in comprehending Sufism.

The Master’s speech and his writing style in
the original text are lucid and conversational, but there is a difficulty in
translating esoteric ontological concepts into English. Therefore, in order to
add to the understanding and the translation of the concepts discussed here,
efforts were concentrated on the following points:

Translations
from the Koran: I have not adhered to any single translation of the Koran,
although the best-known translations have been consulted. As elsewhere, I have
not hesitated to sacrifice accuracy for clarity where called for.

From
Turkish, Arabic, Persian To English: The original of this book is in
Turkish, with frequent use of Arabic and Persian words. However, in order to
help the reader, I have—except on a few occasions—tried to use Arabic
equivalents of the Turkish and Persian words scattered throughout the original
text.

Scholarly texts on Sufism are usually peppered
with italicized Arabic originals of special terms. This is not without reason,
since the original words possess more depth than their English-language
equivalents do. In a book such as this one, however, intended as it is for a
general readership, it was considered superfluous to include Arabic words when
perfectly good counterparts for them could be found in English, by choosing the
closest sense in a given context. Hence, this translation contains a minimum
amount of Arabic words, and the ones present are generally Sufic technical
terms for which the presentation of the Arabic originals is a must. Diacritical
marks have been omitted. Technical terms without their originals are indicated
by italicizing them or by capitalizing their first letters, especially when
they first occur in a text.

Translation
of the words “Allah”, “dhikr” and “salat”: In
Islam, “Allah” is the proper name, the personal name of God. In English we use
the capitalized form, “God,” to refer to the Deity, who is One. The lower-case
form refers to fictitious deities whose existence has been assumed in the
previous history of humanity. Even when it indicates one of a kind, however,
“God” is still a generic, not a specific, name. There was once only a single
specimen of homo sapiens, yet he had
a name and it was Adam.

Absolute Reality, being all-encompassing, has
both personal and impersonal aspects, but in Islam He is addressed as a person.
And “Allah” is the name He has chosen for Himself. He desires, even demands, to
be called by this name. This is similar to the way in which the Hebrews address
God by the “tetragrammaton,” the unpronounceable YHWH. Although it was
forbidden to vocalize this word, we know that they probably pronounced it as
“Yahweh” or “Jehovah”.

As an interesting and significant aside, it may
be mentioned that this word is also of Arabic origin. According to Professor T.
James Meek, author of Hebrew Origins,
the name was foreign to the Hebrews, and in their attempts to explain it they
associated it with hayah, “to be,”
from which they derived the meaning usually ascribed to Yahweh, “I am.”
Professor Meek himself deems an origin from the Arabic root HWY, “to blow”,
more probable. Thanks to the Master, however, we are now able to give the
correct form and meaning: Ya Huwa,
which may be translated as “O He,” another name by which God likes to be called
in Islam. The third person singular form refers to the absolute transcendence
of God, and is the ethically proper form of address in certain contexts. The
upshot is that even before Moses, the Arabs already possessed a second name for
God of great importance which was adopted by the Hebrews.

But to return to the main line of discussion:
Another noteworthy aspect of the name “Allah” is that it carries within it the
power of the presence of God, so that many Sufis have achieved an experience of
God by constantly calling upon His name. Indeed, “Allah” is the most
comprehensive and Supreme Name of God. Hence, God is almost always referred to
by the name He prefers, Allah, in the original text. In view of the
unfamiliarity of this name to non-Moslem readers, however, the word “God” has
been used in its place to express clearly what we mean, in almost all occasions
except where it is absolutely unavoidable.

Concerning dhikr,
this refers to the continuous repetition of a religious formula, such as one of
God’s names discussed above. This may be done either
vocally (verbally, externally) or silently (mentally, internally). This
technical term has overtones of remembrance, incantation, invocation, and the
best way to describe it, perhaps, is as the repetition of a keyword, “keyword”
in the present case meaning a sacred word or formula assigned by a perfect
master that unlocks the doors of inner space. In order to be consistent, I have
tried to use “invocation” for dhikr as
far as possible throughout the text.

Salat, which is namadh in Persian, poses a problem in
translation that could not finally be resolved here. Although generally
translated as “Prayer(s)” into English, it is so different from what is
ordinarily meant by the term that an alternative is called for; yet in the end,
I had to opt for retaining this customary form of translation. Salat is different
from any other kind of worship. One is tempted to call it “Islamic Yoga” in
order to convey a sense of its nature to the West, but this too falls miserably
short of the mark. Ultimately, the only solution may be for the West to become
familiar with these terms, dhikr and salat/namadh, and to use them in the same
way—freely and without fear of being grossly misunderstood—as Yoga and Mantra
are now used.

Gender problems: Turkish is delightfully
free of gender associations in the third person. The singular form, “o”, can
mean “he,” “she”—even “it”. Hence, whenever we are speaking about people, it is
automatically understood that both sexes are included. It was impossible to
carry this over into English, so it should be realized from the outset that wherever we are not talking specifically
about women, “he” also means “she”. The form “s/he” has been used
occasionally, but it is clumsy, as is “his or her”.

The original of this book is basically an
anthology, drawn from various sources which remain anonymous except in cases
where the author is—most often—a famous Sufi or poet.

Not all selections in the Turkish original lent
themselves to translation with equal ease. Some of those in the original had,
therefore, to be omitted entirely. Others had to be, not just translated, but
also adapted to the English language and Western culture. In return, however,
the Master gave permission to use choice texts from his other publications,
which an English-speaking readership would, it was hoped, find to be of the
greatest benefit and interest. This applies not merely to entire texts, but to
portions of texts that have been interspersed into the book where required.
Hence, many texts have been substantially rewritten, and even new texts have
been added where necessary. This is why the present book is more a new book
than a translation, and also why it is not published under the Master’s name.

Another point is that the original book
consisted of a mixed anthology. For instance, you would find a relatively accessible
text side by side with a highly complex and profound one. In view of the
difficulty this would inevitably present for readers already unfamiliar with
the subject-matter, the attempt has been made to order the text linearly, and a
step-by-step approach has been aimed at—so that if you start
at page one and read through the entire book, the chain of reasoning and
information should not, as far as possible, be interrupted. In all this, the
main concern has been to remain faithful to the spirit, if not necessarily to
the letter, of the original. As the chapters are “stand-alone” texts—i.e., intended to be read individually rather than at one
sitting—a certain amount of repetition could not be avoided. A subject dealt
with briefly in one place is generally expanded upon in other places, but it
was thought that cross-references would needlessly complicate matters.
Editorial and translation comments have been added as footnotes, within
brackets in the main text, or in italics at the beginning and/or end of a text.

Perhaps it will not be apparent to many—and so
needs to be stated at the outset—that what we have here is the Mother Lode, the
living core, of authentic Sufism. Some of the material here may strike you as
familiar, even mundane. Yet tucked away in corners are small nuggets that have
been handed down through the ages by the famous Oral Transmission of the Sufis,
and have as far as is known never before seen print. The explanation about Ya Huwa above is a case in point.
Another is the double Ascension of some prophets described in the Introduction,
which, to the best of our knowledge, has never been committed to writing.

The book is organized into roughly three parts.
The first part consists mainly of introductory information. The second part,
dealing with women, democracy and administration, deals with social subjects
and provides sorely-needed answers to some questions. (An earlier chapter,
“Social and Ecological Vistas,” would also fall within this group.) The final
part deals mainly with Sufism, and thus with matters of a spiritual and
mystical nature. A pamphlet by the Master on the subject of world peace is
included at the end as an appendix.

Special thanks are due to Tim Thurston and
Peter Murphy for their proofreading, suggestions, and invaluable help in
bringing the book to its present form, as well as to all others who contributed
to it in any way. I am indebted to Mr. Sadettin Zorlutuna for his help in all
further details after the completion of the manuscript.

This book introduces many of the concepts of,
and forms the background to, the Master’s last major
work: The School of Wisdomsoon, it is
hoped, to be translated into English.

I find it not inappropriate here to conclude
with Professor Ungan’s words:

May the favors of the Reality Most High be with you, the
reader, at all times; may He grant the vision to comprehend things as they
really are. May the translator be forgiven, if he has made mistakes here, by
every party of concern.

H. Bayman

January 1, 1997

FOREWORD

“A little science leads one away from God, a
great deal of science leads one back to Him.”[1]
According to noted historian Paul Johnson, as much as 80 percent of scientists
believe in God. Among them have been the greatest scientists the world has ever
seen. Scientists who believe in God run through the whole spectrum of
scientific disciplines, from physics, which studies the external world, to
psychology, which studies the inner world of man.

Albert Einstein, one of the greatest physicists
of the twentieth century and certainly the most famous, remarked: “The Lord God
is subtle, but malicious he is not.” On another occasion, he explained his
faith as follows: “The most beautiful thing we can experience is the
mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science...

“To know that what is impenetrable to us really
exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty,
which our dull faculties can comprehend only in the most primitive forms—this
feeling is at the center of true religiousness. In this sense, and in this
sense only, I belong to the ranks of the devoutly religious men...

“It is enough for me... to reflect upon the
marvelous structure of the universe which we can dimly perceive, and to try
humbly to comprehend even an infinitesimal part of the intelligence manifested
in nature.”

In Einstein’s vision, the Lord God manifests
Himself in nature with the highest wisdom, the greatest beauty, and with
infinite intelligence, subtly but not maliciously. And true religiosity is the
source of all true art and science. It takes a scientist of Einstein’s stature
to recognize the deep beauty, profound order, and magnificent intelligence
manifested in “blind nature.”

Einstein was firmly of the opinion that “God
does not play dice with the universe.” His detractors on this point, Niels Bohr
and Werner Heisenberg, were the founders of the “Copenhagen school” of quantum
mechanics, which favored a probabilistic interpretation of quantum events. Yet in relation to God, Bohr and Heisenberg, too, found it
necessary to speak of “the central order of the universe,” for probability,
too, has its mathematical laws—so much so, in fact, that the illustrious
mathematician John von Neumann—who also helped invent the modern computer—once
remarked: “Probability is black magic.” There are laws that govern even
chance, and all order, and all laws of mathematics—including laws of
probability—and of science, are the design of the Divine Lawgiver.

On the other end of the spectrum, Carl Gustav
Jung, the psychologist who delved deepest into the human unconscious in the
twentieth century, replied to the question: “Do you now believe in God?” as
follows: “I know. I do not need to believe. I know.” In other words, Jung did
not simply believe; he knew God
exists. In the face of such testimony, the efforts of those who strive to deny
God are puny and misinformed. Just how puny is highlighted by Jung’s following
remark: “A man can know less about God than an ant can know of the contents of
the British Museum.”

The founders of modern science—Kepler,
Descartes, Barrow, Leibniz, Gilbert, Boyle, Newton, etc.—were all deeply and
genuinely religious thinkers, for whom God was the chief mathematician, beyond
rigid scholastic frames and more mystical and Pythagorean in nature. Both
Newton—the father of British empiricism—and Descartes—the originator of French
rationalism—were profoundly religious thinkers. The same view of God as chief
mathematician has been shared by eminent scientists in our century. “From the
intrinsic evidence of His creation,” wrote the renowned physicist James Jeans,
“the Great Architect begins to appear as a pure mathematician.” Paul Dirac, the
Nobel prizewinning quantum physicist and discoverer of antimatter, observed:
“God is a mathematician of a very high order, and He used very advanced
mathematics in constructing the universe.”

The views of all these scientists—and many
others—have encouraged us to write this book. Alfred North
Whitehead, the great mathematician and philosopher, expressed his thoughts as
follows: “Religion is the vision of something which stands beyond, behind, and
within, the passing flux of immediate things; something which is real, and yet
waiting to be realized; something which is a remote possibility, and yet the
greatest of present facts; something that gives meaning to all that passes, yet
eludes apprehension; something whose possession is the final good, and yet
beyond all reach; something which is the ultimate ideal, and the hopeless
quest.”

On this last point, we would beg to differ with
Whitehead. The final good is not beyond all reach, and the quest is not
hopeless. For the mystics, as Josiah Royce said, “are the most thorough going
empiricists in the history of philosophy”, and Sufism represents the summit of
mysticism. And just as there is physical science, there also exists such a
thing as “spiritual science.” There exists a religion, moreover, where religion
and science—knowledge of the inner world and knowledge of the external world—do
not clash, but complement each other.

* * *

Even though we live at the peak of
technological civilization—with air travel, skyscrapers and the Internet—the
world we live in constitutes a spiritual desert.

Man’s scientific and technological capabilities
have been stretched to the utmost. Yet his emotional life has become
progressively stultified, his moral life increasingly barren.

But this is not the true stature of man. A man
is a complete organism in which all the parts are equally important. And when
it is fine-tuned, this totality is the most wonderful thing in the universe,
with a destiny that beggars the imagination.

The brain itself is sold short under these
circumstances. We treat it as a machine for reasoning, and nothing more. Yet if
the human totality were to be developed harmoniously, that is in a truly
holistic manner, then we would discover abilities of the brain that, in our
present deplorable condition, cannot even be guessed at. This lopsided
development stands in need of correction. We need to achieve a balance that
will fulfill more—ideally, all—of our potentials, and if we are able to do so,
we will be happy, for happiness lies in the realization of the purposes for which
we have been designed.

This does not entail throwing our present
achievements to the winds. We need not forsake our knowledge, our technology,
or our civilization. Nor need we become hermits and live in a mountain cave.
What needs to be done is to bring our neglected
aspects up to a par with those which are already highly developed. In terms of
the human entity, the focus for this is the heart and the spirit. In social and
ecological terms, it is morality, or ethical conduct. The fact that we have seldom
realized, however, is that these two are coupled, to an extent that one cannot
exist without the other. Moreover, moral conduct is the foundation, the
infrastructure, for the elevation of the spirit. No spiritual improvement is
possible without salutary conduct.

Traditionally, these fields have fallen within
the domain of religion. Many of us have distanced ourselves from religion, and
rightly so. But even if we were justified in doing so for a variety of reasons,
this still does not justify throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Suppose
we had thrown out our reason and knowledge in a similar way—where would we be
now? “Science without religion is lame,” Albert Einstein said; “religion
without science is blind.” Man needs both.

The truth is that we have become alienated from
our spirits. And this estrangement has progressed to such an extent that some
of us even deny that we possess spirits at all. But the spirit is nothing but
that which animates the body. To say that spirit does not exist in a living
being is like saying that a radio or TV set can work without electricity.
Suppose a man born blind came to you and said: “Eyesight cannot exist, because
I have never experienced its existence.” Would you believe him? Philosopher
David Hume claimed that he had conducted lengthy introspection and could not
find any trace of man’s soul. But in order to find something, one first has to
look in the proper place, and in the right way.

Nasruddin Hodja (also know as Mullah Nasruddin,
the humorous sage of the Middle East) was once looking for something in the
middle of the street. He was down on all fours, searching. A man who knew him
came by, and asked him what he was looking for. “I’ve lost a key,” the Hodja
replied. So the man began to help him. After a while, though, unable to find
anything, the man asked: “Hodja, where did you say you dropped the key?” “Down
in the basement of my house,” the Hodja said.

The man laughed. “Why, Hodja,” he exclaimed,
“in that case we’re looking in the wrong place. Why aren’t we looking in your
basement instead?” “Ah,” said the Hodja, “it’s too dark in my basement. This is
where the light is.”

But if we deny even the existence of the
spirit, then we are certainly bound never to find it. Because if we believe a
thing does not exist, of course there is no need even to go looking for it, so
the possibility of discovering—or recovering—it is reduced to zero. Those who
haven’t the slightest inkling of what the spirit is tell us: “Spirit does not
exist,” and we believe them. Those who haven’t the slightest notion about God
tell us God does not exist, and we believe them too. Clearly, if we choose a
crow as our guide, our noses are sure never to be free of mud.

Man is an amphibious creature. He lives in the
material world with his body and in the spiritual world with his soul. A person
shorn of one aspect cannot soar, any more than a bird with one wing can fly.

We have starved the heart—not the physical
heart, but its emotional and spiritual counterpart—of nourishment, until it has
entered suspended animation. And we have denied sustenance to the spirit, until
it has fallen into a coma. At this point, it is easy for a doctor to come in
and, confusing the lack of signs of life with absence of the source itself, to
pronounce the patient dead. Yet the heart and the spirit, in spite of their
apparent lifelessness, are neither dead nor nonexistent; they await our tender
loving care in order to be revivedthey live dormant, waiting for spring.

We have this civilization that we have built up
with our own hands. Its material achievements are unmatched in recorded
history. And yet it is a civilization where we have failed to complement our
material progress with moral—and, by implication, spiritual—progress. We have
conquered outer space whilst forgetting and deserting our inner space. And
because we have failed to strike this balance, the whole edifice is trembling
uncontrollably before our very eyes, as evidenced in even the everyday media.
The building, shaken by an earthquake, threatens disintegration.

It is no use to lament when a man goes into a
school and butchers a bunch of innocent children, nor does it make sense to
brand the act as evil and let it go at that. What we witness today is the
plaster falling from the ceiling. In thirty years we have regressed, from
people being left lying helpless in the streets, to serial killers whose
achievements are reminiscent more of war than of crime, and the spread of violence from the United States to Europe and
Japan until there’s no safe place left. What is needed is a solution. We need a methodology that can
be practiced by everyone, and if everyone sweeps his doorstep, the whole city
will be spic and span.

For the first time in history we have a
civilization that is truly global. Furthermore, all
the knowledge and, more importantly, all the wisdom distilled drop by golden
drop by all the civilizations in history, are at our fingertips, if only we
would choose to avail ourselves of them. We need a faith that is truly global to complete our global civilization—a faith that
takes into account and coordinates all the religions of the past. In its
absence, our metropolises and all our accomplishments will sink into a
quicksand of violence, ruthlessness, and destruction.

We think that intelligence, which we value so
highly, is centered in the mind. The Sufi sages, however, held (and continue to
hold) a different view. Like the ancient Chinese and Egyptians, they considered
true intelligence to be based in the heart; according to them all, the seat of
the intellect was not the mind, nor indeed the heart alone, but the
“heartmind.” We have severed the connection between the mind and the heart, and
as long as it is not reestablished, all our attempts to achieve wisdom will be
in vain.

Many have lamented a world that has not only
differentiated but polarized the mind and the heart, so that the two are
mutually exclusive. This schizoid split between reason and emotion has yielded
precisely what one would expect: uncontrolled oscillation between the poles of
heartlessness and mindlessness. Either we have hard-boiled rationalism and
science, which exclude affection and spirit altogether, or mediums,
fortune-tellers, spiritualism, and similar fringe beliefs, which require us to
throw away our rationality and intellect. Whereas all the while, what we need
is a harmonious synthesis of the mind and heart.

The emergence of fringe cults calls to mind the
end of another great civilization: that of Rome. That civilization did not go
out with a bang but with a whimper, though we may not have even that option
left open to us. Historians are still debating the reasons for the fall of
Roman civilization, for these are by no means as clear-cut as we would like
them to be. The result was the Dark Ages. But today we cannot afford to give up
our present civilization, for the cost would be far too great. If this
civilization goes, humanity goes with it.

Can we have the best of both worlds? Can we
both save this civilization, and carry it to loftier heights? The answer to
both questions is: yes.

In the
hectic rush of modern life, few of us have the time or the resources to carry
out a prolonged investigation of religions. For this reason, most of us rely on
hearsay or superficial impressions in judging a religion. The problem is
compounded by two other factors. First, the differences between religions are
not matters on which the poorly informed layman can easily pass judgment. And
second, what a religion demands of its adherents and what those all-too-human adherents
do in real life are two different things. The merits of a religion should be
judged on the basis of its precepts, not on the failures or inabilities of its
followers. Yet at the same time, a religion should cause a noticeable
improvement in the average person who practices it to an average degree. This
may be difficult, though not impossible, to assess.

A religion may be broadly termed a system of
beliefs. But the acid test of a belief is the actions that derive from it. If a
person claims to believe one thing and yet acts otherwise, it is the action and
not the belief that is valid. Actions speak louder than words. If a person says
one thing and does another, his claims do not count—his true belief is whatever
leads to that sort of action. “Deeds are a person’s mirror, mere claims do not
heed; the level of one’s intellect is apparent in one’s work.” If actions and
beliefs are in synch with each other, then we can truly say that a person lives
according to the lights of his faith. As Rumi, the mystic, rightly said:
“Either appear as you are, or be as you appear to be.”

In what follows we would like to look at a
faith that, if implemented correctly, is a foolproof algorithm for success and
happiness. If a person applies it properly, that person will succeed. If a
nation applies it correctly, that nation will succeed. Look closely at people
and nations that have been successful, and you will discover that they have
applied a small subset of the precepts of this faith. Look at those that have
failed, and you will find that they have failed to apply those precepts, even,
in some cases, in spite of their claim to profess that very faith.

Untruth can only lead to error. Even those
tenets which at first glance one would regard as metaphysical are true, for metaphysical
principles, if pursued long enough, will lead to concrete outcomes in even the
physical world. We are all metaphysicians, without knowing it. The illiterate
peasant who takes a simple step is unconsciously assuming the continuity of
spacetime—a metaphysical principle that happens to be borne out by events.[2]

By now
many of us have experimented with a variety of religions and philosophies. Some
have appealed to us more than others. Yet the big one still eludes us—or
rather, we elude it. Many accounts of Sufism have been published in the West,
but without making allowance for cultural differences. When we try to
understand something, we should avoid the danger of pigeonholeing it—of placing
it into our collection of well-known and well-understood categories. This is
reductionism, and once you reduce something to another thing, it ceases to be
the original. Once you dissect a cat, it becomes a dead cat. The difference
between life and death is all the difference in the world.

For a long time, our attention in the West has
been focused on the religions and philosophies of the East. This is not an
error. Instead, it points to the fact that Western minds have correctly
diagnosed the problem, and are looking for a solution in the right place. Then
where have we gone wrong? And why haven’t we been successful in finding a
solution?

The answer is that we have tried to temper the
extreme rationalism, materialism and mechanism of the West by the equally arid
spirituality, nontheism, and asceticism of the East. Herein lies the crux of
the problem. Aware that sitting at one end of the seesaw has landed us in a
fix, we seek salvation by going overboard and trying to sit on the other end
(or, if you wish, by jumping from one pan of the scales into the other). But the
seesaw will then be as unbalanced as it was originally. From the mind we seek
to go over to the heart, yet the heart by itself is as helpless as the mind in
isolation. What is needed is a synthesis
—in order to balance the seesaw, we need to go over to the middle, not to one
or the other extreme. We need a system that equally embraces our materiality
and our spirituality; that synthesizes our hearts and our minds—and even then,
without the presence of God the two are still empty. What we need is not a compromise,
as between water and oil which do not mix, but a synthesis, like that of
hydrogen and oxygen, which combine to yield water—the sparkling water of life,
a substance entirely different from oxygen or hydrogen taken alone. We need to
fuse the good of the West with the good of the East. Today we have the
opportunity to build on the best of our civilization—to become truly
“civilized.” And geographically as well, the solution between East and West is
to be found in the Middle. As the Koran puts it, “a lamp... kindled from a
Blessed Tree... an olive that is neither of the East
nor of the West, whose oil wellnigh would shine, even if no fire touched it;
Light upon Light” (24:35). And this light, because it belongs to neither, can
illuminate both East and West.

We have plodded long and hard on a difficult
journey. Our search, we may think, has been in vain. Now, for the last time,
someone asks us to consider—or reconsider—something we may or may not have
encountered earlier. But do not despair!—where there is life, there is hope,
and the most valuable treasures are not discovered without a long and daunting
hunt.

INTRODUCTION

Ascension

As everyone knows, each and every one of the
prophets have ascended to God. We are not going to explain these Ascents here in
detail, but rather will summarize them briefly. There has been no prophet
without ritual Prayer, nor without Ascension (miraj). Many of them have ascended twice.

Adam had his first Ascension when his spirit
was created by God. His second Ascent occurred at the mountain of Arafat
together with our mother Eve.

Idris (Enoch), in accordance with the Koranic
verse: “We raised him to a high place,” ascended and did not come back. Noah,
at the time of the Flood associated with his name, ascended while on the ship
he made by God’s command.

Abraham ascended to heaven twice: First, when
he was thrown into the fire, and second, at the moment when he was about to
sacrifice his beloved son Ishmael. These two are very important points.

Jonah, at the time when he was swallowed by the
whale, was inspired by God Almighty with the verse: “There is no god but You.
Glory be to You, I have been of the wrongdoers” (21:87).
By repeating this verse, he made his Ascension in the belly of the whale.

King Solomon, the son of David, told his father
he would accept prophethood on two conditions. He said to him: “If God Almighty
grants the prophethood on both physical and spiritual grounds, I will accept
it.” God was pleased with these words of Solomon, and his request was granted.
This became his Ascension, because he wanted it that way.

As for Moses, he also performed two Ascensions.
In his first ascent, right after his birth his mother placed him in a basket of
bulrushes and set him adrift on the Nile. His second ascent occurred on Mount
Sinai.

Jesus also had two Ascensions. In the first
one, the Virgin Mary was asked: “How did you get pregnant?” Jesus answered from
his mother’s womb: “My mother’s words are the truth, heed my mother.” His
second ascent happened during the Crucifixion (his ascension was spiritual).

The Ascension of the Prophet Mohammed was
superior to those of the other prophets. Crossing the Seven Heavens, he
performed his Ascension starting from the seventh, conversed with God, and
returned with the greatest good news to his community and all mankind.

Esoteric Knowledge

Esoteric Knowledge (ilm ladunni: literally, ‘knowledge from Our side’[3]—hidden
or inner knowledge of things conferred by God), with the permission and order
of God Almighty, fills the whole earth and the heavens. I, humble person that I
am, cannot explain this here. However, we may be content to give a few ciphers.

Do all prophets possess esoteric knowledge, or
don’t they?

According to legend, after gathering his entire
army, Alexander the Great, with a sign from the Esoteric, started looking for
the Elixir of Life in order to achieve immortality. After a considerable amount
of exploration, two soldiers set out from the camp one day to continue the
search, with the understanding that they would return and report if they
happened to find the Elixir.

Around noon they arrived at a river. In order
to have lunch, they took out some dried fishes and proceeded to eat. When they
threw the remaining skeleton of a fish into the river, an amazing thing
happened. The skeleton regained life, took on flesh and appeared to them in the
form of a living fish.

The one known as Khidr[4]
peeled a fish, ate its meat and, holding the skeleton from its tail, immersed
it in the water. The fish immediately reconstituted, regained life and started
squirming in his hand. To his friend, Elias, he said: “We have found the
Elixir.” They drank from the water, and also watered their horses. Their human
attributes disappeared, and sublime, divine attributes came over them.

This is the story. Now for the truth: This
water was a flowing water, a river. Whoever drank from this water should have
become like Khidr and Elias. However, since
their goal was the Elixir, only these two ascended, only they could ascend
by this water.

The story goes on: The two friends returned to
the army of Alexander the Great, but they did not tell Alexander about their
discovery. Instead, they requested permission to leave the army and go back.
Alexander did not grant their request, since he did not want his army to break
ranks. In spite of their leader’s ban, however, Khidr and Elias left the army
and started off. Alexander sent his army after them, and ordered their capture.
However, during a close pursuit, both of them were suddenly lost from sight.

Did the earth swallow them up, or were they
raised to the sky?

All the attempts of Alexander’s men to find
them met with failure. So they went back, and reported to Alexander the Great.

Alexander then said: “I overexerted myself and
my army in order to achieve immortality, yet the Elixir fell to their lot. Mine was only a rebellion against the will of God.”

This brings us to Moses and Khidr (see the
Koran, 18:60-65).

Moses, with the permission of God Almighty,
attained a very high level in his knowledge of the Outward and Inward sciences.
In spite of this, God declared:

“Moses, you must learn Esoteric Knowledge.”

Moses asked: “My Lord, is esoteric knowledge
beyond the Outward and Inward sciences you have given me?”

God answered: “O Moses, esoteric knowledge is
superior to all the other sciences. The time has now come for you to discover
this. Go to the place where the two seas meet (to a designated pier on the
banks of Red Sea). There, you will see a man of such-and-such a description.
Tell him: ‘I have come to learn esoteric knowledge from you.’“

The man described by God was none other than
Khidr.

So Moses went and found Khidr, who answered to
the description. After greeting him, he told him about the above order. Khidr
said: “I was waiting for you here on God’s orders.”

They became companions, and soon boarded a
ship. Although he was a great prophet, Moses was now taking orders from Khidr.
While the ship was sailing on the high seas, Khidr at one point said: “Let’s go
downstairs together.”

They went to the lowest deck of the ship. Khidr
said to Moses: “Take this hammer and make a hole through the ship’s hull with
this nail.”

Moses objected: “There are many people and
animals on this ship.”

Khidr repeated: “Just be patient, make a hole.”

So Moses obeyed. Water started flowing into the
ship. A short while later, they were invaded by pirates. But by this time, the
water had already flooded the first deck. Upon seeing this, the pirates fled,
amongst shouts: “The ship is sinking,” and so saved themselves. On the other
hand, the people on board had panicked. The captain of the ship was shouting
orders: “What are you waiting for? Abandon ship!” Just as they were about to do
so, Moses and Khidr plugged the hole with a wooden peg. Water stopped flowing
in, the water in the ship was bailed out, and they all continued their voyage.

When Moses and Khidr got off the ship, they
landed in another town. While they were disembarking, youngsters were playing
ball just as they do today in a field adjacent to the port.

Khidr came face to face with a young man about
eighteen years old. Khidr looked at him with a stern face, whereupon the young
man attacked him. The friends of the young man tried to separate them from each
other. Khidr struck the jugular vein on the young man’s neck, and he died
immediately. Moses and Khidr escaped through the crowd in the ensuing
commotion.

During evening hours they called on a town. No
matter which door they knocked on, nobody would open.

By then it was midnight. Moses, being human,
was hungry and cold. Khidr, since he had drunk of the Elixir with the
permission of God, was affected neither by hunger nor by cold.

Presently they came across a ruined wall, on
the verge of falling down. Khidr said: “Let’s repair this wall.”

Moses: “What are you talking about? I’m cold
and hungry. We’ve been driven from every door in this town. And now you want to
repair this ruined wall!”

Khidr said: “Don’t argue with me, just help me
do our work.”

Moses had no choice; he began to work. They
repaired and restored the wall. But inwardly, Moses was getting very angry with
Khidr. He made this apparent by saying: “What are you trying to accomplish?”

Khidr sighed, and answered him as follows:
“Moses, you have been too impatient. You could not stand three events. Now, I
am going to explain them to you.

“We drilled a hole in the hull of the ship. You
saw with your own eyes what happened next: pirates invaded the ship. They were
going to rob the ship and kill us all. The ship owner’s money was honestly
earned. I felt pity and saved them.

“The young man I killed was the son of a
prominent man. He was rebellious towards his parents. He also belittled the
people of that town. If one day he were to rule there, he would have oppressed
the people. We killed one man, and saved a hundred thousand from harm.

“Consider now this wall. The man who built this
house was a righteous man. He built this house with money earned honestly. He
put the remaining money in a jug, and buried it near the wall we repaired.
(Khidr pointed with his hand:) Right here, beneath this foundation.

“The father and mother passed away, the uncle
took custody of the children, and the house was ruined. The kids are still
young. After they leave their uncle they will build a house on this lot, and this money will then be their share.”

Khidr continued: “I think you now understand
the reasons for the things we did. But you were too impatient; our
companionship is at an end. We must now depart.”

Khidr gave his hand to Moses, and they shook
hands. Moses began to weep and wail: “If you leave me here now, where am I
going to go? I don’t know my way back. Please don’t leave me.”

Khidr said: “Don’t worry. If you are wise, we
will be together all the time. Give your hand to me and shut your eyes tight. Open
them when I say so.”

Moses gave him his hand. Khidr said “close your
eyes” and “open them,” in immediate succession. Moses looked around; he was in
front of his house.

This, with the permission, grant and favor of
God, is referred to as “the folding of space” (tayy al-makan).

* * *

With the permission of God and the approval of
His Messenger, a number of saints from the School of Mohammed have become
friends with Khidr. Moreover, they still continue to do so. I would like to
give you an example.

During the Second World War, I used to live in
a village known as Mako (its new name is Aktarlar). On the 20th of June, I
wished to visit my Master, Hadji[5]
Ahmet Effendi. The distance between us was about five hours. Half the way I
needed to walk was uphill; the remaining half was downhill.

By the time I reached the hilltop, I was tired.
I wanted to catch my breath, and sank to my knees. Looking downward, I saw two
persons, a man and a woman, cutting grass for animals and petting each other
from time to time. I could not take my eyes off them. Suddenly, I heard my
Master’s voice: “Strangers at play. What is that to you?”

I got up right away, and continued on my way
without a backwards glance. However, when I left home my wish had been: “Today,
on the hill, let me see Khidr on my way.”

When I passed the peak and started descending,
I came across a familiar couple, a husband and wife. We said hello, chatted for
a while, and departed.

I said to myself: “These can’t be Khidr. Khidr
travels alone and lives alone.” And I did not meet anyone else until I reached
the blissful residence of my Master.

I went directly to the guest room. He was
sitting alone. I greeted him and kissed his blessed hand. After exchanging a
few words, he said: “Hamid Effendi from your town has been waiting here for two
days. (I knew this man.) He was very insistent, saying: ‘I will not go anywhere
if you don’t show me Khidr.’ He just would not leave. I told him to get out
half an hour before you came in, and shut the door on him. And now you’ve come.
I felt pity for the poor man. He was coming in, going out, and asking for
Khidr, all the while that he was sitting right next to Khidr.”

If you were in my place, what would you make of
this conversation?

But I, poor Ahmet Kayhan that I am, understood
nothing. It did not even occur to me that I should at least have kissed his
hand again.

You, my brothers and sisters, don’t be heedless
and careless like I was. Try to love and understand the people you see and
admire.

I hope these words of mine will not sound
strange to you: He who is a saint, he who is a Friend of God (wali ), is with Khidr every instant.

Hadji Ahmet Kayhan

MAN AND FAITH

Most of us have experienced
deep feelings—of awe and wonder as we witness the dawn slowly emerging from the
night, of thankfulness when a tremendous weight is lifted from our shoulders
(perhaps at the recovery of a loved one from an illness), or of hope as we
witness two former arch-enemies shaking hands in reconciliation—in short,
anytime we feel essentially human: somehow at the limits of what we know, hope
or fear. What is it that stirs in our hearts then? Many of us, as we sit
in peace and reverence, become conscious of an inner light that is burning in
thankfulness and in humility. Some may answer that they sit before nothing—a
vast emptiness that reaches from the beginning of time and pans out to its end.
Yet many have also come to realise that the bewilderment, affection and
gratitude that we experience as light in our hearts is testimony to our faith
in God, the creator of the universes.

Humanity is united in many
essential ways—sharing the same earth and resources, the same needs and
abilities—and ultimately (when superficial differences are cast aside) the same
faith in our Creator, the Angels, the Books and Messengers, and in the
continuation after death of the spirit that every single human being has been
endowed with. Yet whenever a prophet has been sent to man in order to
guide and direct a people with the will and law of God, man has demanded
extraordinary proof —miracles—from God’s messengers, instead of looking at the
core value of the message and accepting it. This not only shows the difficulty
of the passages man has to tackle before he can attain faith, it also
demonstrates the importance of the struggle he has to engage in against his own
self in order to find the True Path. As the following sacred verse indicates:
“Does it not suffice them, (O Mohammed), that We have sent you the book which
is rehearsed to them? Surely there is a mercy and wisdom in it for those who
believe” (the Koran, 29:51). As for the extraordinary
events, signs, wonders and miracles given to prophets by God as bona fides,
these are actually performed by God Himself. One should remember this fine
point, and should not forget that prophets, too, are servants of God. As the
Prophet Mohammed has expressed it: “The highest station is the station of being
a servant of God.”

As the sacred verse: “The purpose of man’s
creation is to know God, and to serve and worship Him” (51:56)
indicates, it is necessary for us to heed God’s call through His messengers and
to try to fully comprehend them if we want to lay claim to a flawless faith.
What exalts man above the rest of creation is his faith in God and his love of
God. This is our forte. It is the Prophets of God who have taught man his
sacred aspect, showing us the way out of all dead-ends and fashioning us into
the most sublime of all creatures.

The Existence and the Unity of the One Creator

Thinkers and scientists from all countries and
across the centuries have reflected on the unity and existence of God, on the
limitations of their own existence, and have come to realise the Unity of Being
and God’s omnipotence, as the following viewpoints testify:

Kant:
Every visible creature is a shadow of the invisible Creator. Human beings must
see the truth. But we show weakness in our faith in God. Even so does the
pigeon, in order to fly, push against the air that keeps it aloft.

Dr. A.H.
Cronin: When we think about the universe and its mysteries, its order, its
subtleties, its vastness and its brilliance, we have of course also to conceive
of a creator, namely, God. Observe the universe, and investigate. Search for
the meaning of life. You will come face to face with a shrouded enigma, a deep
mystery. This cannot have arisen out of nothingness, for only nothing can
emerge from nothing.

Sir James
Jeans: It is impossible, he said, for chance to build the order of the
stars: “From the intrinsic evidence of His creation, the Great Architect begins
to appear as a pure mathematician.”

Abraham
Lincoln: I am amazed, said he, at anyone who, after having looked at the
sky and beheld the grandeur of the universe, does not believe in God.

Laplace: The power that determines the heavenly objects in the
solar system, their densities, diameters and orbits, and that limits the
periods of revolution of planets around the sun and of their satellites around
the planets, is a power dependent on the will of God: a continuous order which
it is impossible to explain by coincidence. The existence of God is
certain and beyond dispute.

Prof.
Finkelstein: Intelligence, he said, cannot comprehend itself. At the limit,
there has to be an intelligence that comprehends comprehension itself. Only a
universal intelligence superior to us can solve this mystery, and a power
greater than intelligence is none other than God.

Einstein:
God cannot be seen or known without knowing an infinity of dimensions. Only He
exists, and He has created human beings in the universe with a purpose. “The
presence of a superior reasoning power... revealed in the incomprehensible
universe, forms my idea of God.”

Dirac:
The universe is guided by a superior mathematical order. This order is formed
within the supreme intelligence of the Creator.

Edison:
No human invention can surpass the blade of grass that parts the soil and
emerges from it; for it is God who has created that blade of glass.

Schwartz:
God is the soul of a harmony that is hidden in every atom of the universe, and
which cannot be ignored.

Heisenberg:
What is unknown to us in the nuclear realm resolves all the problems of
physics, and this power can only be attributed to God.

Socrates:
When you behold the highest point of the universe, do you not see the wisdom
inherent in creation? The creator, with His art and order, proclaims Himself in
every event. If not for Him, your mouth would have been situated next to your
anus. I believe in the unseen, absolute Creator.

Professor
F. W. Forster: In his book School and
Character, declares that the man with a perfected faith discovers the depth
of himself. And in order to reach God, he must pass away from life’s
difficulties and not be overcome by these ordeals—the road to God consisting of
fully submitting yourself to Him. Faith in God is one of the basic principles
of man’s education.

There are thousands more such examples of
scientists, thinkers, learned scholars, writers and statesmen from all
traditions, all of whom have faith in God’s Unity and Oneness. However, the
common perspective is dominated by those who declare the denial of God to be
superior, and divisively condemn those who worship—in the name of intellect and
reason, somehow equating ‘belief’ with ‘superstition’. But as we can see,
intellect and faith are not contraries. They are but counterparts that complement
one another.

Humanity Is One

The history of mankind starts with Adam, the
first prophet, and since all humanity descends from this prophet, the whole of
humanity is necessarily esteemed and exalted—and one family. Differences of
color, of language, of physical form or of country in no way undermine this
value. According to God, humanity must be viewed as one.

As declared in the Holy Bible: “And Adam called
his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living” (Genesis 3:20).

“And there are differences of administrations,
but the same Lord” (1 Corinthians 12:5).

“And let the peace of God rule in your hearts,
to which also you are called in one body, and be thankful” (Colossians 3:15).

These statements are further supported by the
Koran: “We have revealed the Book with the Truth. It confirms the Scriptures
which came before, and stands as a guardian over them. To God you shall all
return, and He will resolve your differences for you” (5:48).

“There was a time when men followed but one
religion. Then they disagreed among themselves: but for a Word from your Lord,
decreed long ago, their differences would have been firmly resolved” (10:19).

“Mankind were once one nation. Then God sent
forth prophets to give them good news and to warn them, and with these He sent
down The Book with the Truth” (6:159).

The Messenger of God declares in one of his
sayings: “Humanity are all the individuals of one family, and the whole of
humanity is God’s household. The most valuable and auspicious among them are those
who do good for humanity.”

When we examine the history of the Prophets and
religions, we can see that that they were all commanded to choose Islam as
their religion.

As the Koran testifies on behalf of Noah: “I
was commanded to be of the Moslems” (10:73), and for
Abraham it is said: “We have chosen him of this world. He is of the Righteous
in the Afterlife. The Lord told him to submit to Himself, and he replied that
he had submitted his whole being to his Lord” (2:130-31).

Joseph says: “You are my helper in this world
and in the next. Take my soul while I am in submission (“a Moslem”), and place
me amongst the righteous” (12:101).

Moses addresses his people: “My people, if you
have faith in God, then you are Moslems who have submitted unto Him. Put your
trust in Him” (10:84).

On behalf of Jesus it is said: “When Jesus
found unbelief on their part, he said: ‘Who will be my helpers in the work of
God?’ The Disciples replied: ‘We are God’s helpers: we believe in God, and do
thou bear witness that we are Moslems’“ (3:52).

The Koran informs us that all
the revealed religions have been unified in Islam: “Say, ‘O People of the Book:
come to a common word between you and us—that we worship none but God, that we
associate no partners with Him, that we do not establish from amongst ourselves
lords and patrons other than God.’ If they turn back, say: ‘Bear witness
that we (at least) are Moslems (bowing to God’s will)” (3:64).

‘Islam’ carries the following meanings: to
protect oneself and eschew all badness, hidden or overt, thereby keeping
distant from all kinds of calamity. It means peace and trust, and it means
worship and submission to God. Those who are able to solve and understand the
true message of Islam and the Glorious Koran—People of the Heart—are the real
possessors of knowledge: they are the truly pious and are united in Islam.
These are the people who can be said to truly read the Koran. Thus, they are
the ones who accept the Unity of God, who are obedient and submit to Him,
purifying their heart of all that is other than Him. Islam has been perfected
by God and, by His grace, has been sent to humanity. Thus has Almighty God
completed His benevolence to man. The Glorious Koran gives all the religions
that were revealed by the prophets the general name ‘Islam’. This is made quite
clear: “I have approved Islam as your religion” (5:3).
“If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted of him;
and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost all
spiritual good” (3:85).

Thus we can see that Almighty God has sent all
the messengers to call humanity to unity. Misunderstandings, however, have been
created by those perverting religion according to their worldly desires,
thereby damaging both man and faith—whereas these are in essence inseparable,
like the two sides of a coin.

“And those to whom knowledge has come see that
the Revelation sent down to you from your Lord is the Truth, and that it guides
to the Path of the Exalted in Might, worthy of all praise” (34:6).

That which is seen by those who work to gain
knowledge for themselves testifies to the truth and reality of what the Koran
reveals; they have chosen the true way of Islam.

Recognition of Islam in the West

Alongside people of knowledge in the Islamic
world, many scholars from the Christian world have researched and examined the
wisdom of the Glorious Koran and its miracles.

One of the greatest thinkers of the 19th
century, Edward Gibbon, states in his Decline
and Fall of the Roman Empire that the new faith brought by Mohammed was
purged of the skepticism of uncertainty, and that the Koran provides a
magnificent witness to the unity of God. In such statements he is supporting
not only the Prophet but also the Koran, God’s miracle. Another
great thinker of that century, Thomas Carlyle, in his chapter on “The Hero as
Prophet” in his book Heroes and Hero
Worship, says of the Prophet of God that the words of such a person are a
voice coming from the heart of nature: human beings should heed it above all
else. In comparison, all other words are empty. In other words, compared
to what Mohammed has said, all other utterances are senseless, unreal and
ridiculous. This great thinker, who revered Mohammed and the Koran, was buried
a member of the Church of England, due to the pressure and fear that was
brought to bear against him.

The great Christian missionary, Rev. Bosworth Smith, states in his book Mohammed and Mohammedanism that Mohammed was uneducated, that he
didn’t know how to read and write properly, and yet he was the bringer of such
a book that it is still the common code of all laws, and the one book common to
all prayers. It is a guide and beacon to humanity; all these properties
have been encoded into this book. Accepted reverently and humbly by a sixth of
all human beings living in Bosworth’s day (and a quarter in ours), the Koran is
a miracle of simplicity in style and method. It is the miracle of Mohammed.
Bosworth Smith states, in short, that it is a true and great miracle given him
by God, thus making clear his position as regards Islam.

In his History of Turkey, the famous French author and historian Lamartine
expresses his admiration for the Prophet of God in the following way:
“Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas,
restorer of rational dogmas; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of
one spiritual empire, that is Mohammed. As regards all standards by
which human greatness may be measured, we may ask, is there any man greater
than he?” With these words, Lamartine proclaimed the sublimity of the Prophet
to all the world.

The educator and sociologist
John Davenport, who emphasized the justice of Islam and was a student of the
history of world religions, states in his book Mohammed and the Glorious Koran that Islam never interfered with
the principles of any other religion, and never instituted an Inquisition as in
Christianity. It never aimed at converting people from other religions
by force.[6]
Islam has introduced itself to the world, but has never abased human beings by
forcible religious conversion, court trials or the torture of the Inquisition.
For this reason no less than for the beginnings of science in the modern sense,[7]
the West owes much indeed to the Moslems.

The concept: “Human beings are equal” was first
introduced to the Western world through the stimulus of Islam. Thanks to the
Crusades which served as an eye-opener, the West was able to eradicate the
feudal lordships and the oppression of aristocrats, and thus to build freedom
over their remnants. Besides which, says Davenport, no one
should forget the following point: while ignorance and darkness were reigning
in the West, we obtained our knowledge in the most important fields of
science—in technology, in mathematics and medicine, and even in astronomy—from
Islamic scientists such as Ibn Sina, Averroes, Ibn Baytar, Ali Kushju, Farabi,
and many others. These scientists have guided and enlightened the West. Davenport ends by stating that the words of Mohammed, to the effect
that “Glory and honor are to be found, not in wealth, but in wisdom”, led
Islamic scientists and philosophers in every corner of the world to develop
science and push forward the frontiers of knowledge in their search for wisdom.

The famous American psychoanalyst, Jules
Masserman, in stating his views on leadership (Time magazine, July 15th, 1974), reached the following conclusion:
“The greatest leader of all time is Mohammed” among historical personages. In
spite of being Jewish, he assigned Moses to second place, which is quite
extraordinary. Again, Michael H. Hart, the American
astronomer, historian and mathematician, accorded Mohammed first place and his
own savior, Jesus, third place in his 572-page book, The Greatest 100 Men in History.

Sir James Jeans, the famous physicist and
author of The Mysterious Universe,
whose words have already been quoted above, was a devout churchgoer. Yet when
told about the Koranic verse: “Among His servants, only men of knowledge
(scientists) fear God” (35:28), he exclaimed: “This is
terrific! At the end of fifty years of scientific investigations and
observations, I was forced to believe in God, to love Him and fear Him. An
uneducated person living 1400 years ago could not have uttered these words. If
the truth you mention is in the Koran, it must be the Book of God, and Mohammed
must be a prophet. This is what I believe, you may write this.”

Dr. Wayne Mayer, on the occasion of the meeting
of the International Union of Biology Teachers held on the 25th of March, 1980,
said the following: “In order to be fully human, we need not only science, but
also religion. In order to comprehend the problems of the universe, we must
first know God and His countless attributes. We need the knowledge and learning
contained within the Koran, the word of God. Faith, knowledge and intelligence
will lead humanity to God, the Lord of the Universes.”

Edouard Montet, professor at
the University of Geneva, says in his introduction to his work A Translation of the Meanings of the
Glorious Koran: “If we were to choose only one of the invaluable positive
reforms that the Prophet Mohammed introduced to humanity—forbidding the
practice of burying female children alive—this would be enough to place his
service to humanity at the forefront of the annals of history.”

René Bousset, a French professor, says: “The
Koran is the eternal model of literary beauty. As its commentators have all
testified, it is such an example that neither the angels nor humanity could
achieve the harmony of one single sentence contained in that sacred book.”

In his study, Investigating the Koran, Ernest Renan declares: “In its form, the
Koran represented an advance from the very first moment—in religious terms no
less than literary. The world of literature had never encountered such a form.
This is because it was the word of God.”

Goethe declared: “If Islam is surrender to God,
then we all live and die in Islam. The oneness of God, surrender to His will,
and the mediation of the Prophets—these are all in line with our conceptions.
Faith in the One God always uplifts the spirit, since this belief shows man the
oneness and unity of his inner world.”

The Duke of Weimar stated: “Nobody can develop
further than the principles outlined by Mohammed. All of our laws that have
been formed are found wanting in the face of Islam. Despite all the civilized
possibilities we possess as a European nation, what is for us a first step was
achieved by Mohammed long ago. No one can outstrip him.”

Pushkin, the great Russian poet and man of
letters, who is renowned around the world and who had a tremendous influence in
his time, wrote the following poem after examining the Glorious Koran:

The Merciful
is He, He is the Compassionate

He
revealed the Koran, suffused with light, to Mohammed....

These veils, these
veils, lift up these veils

Let the
barriers to our eyes be lifted,

With the
Koran, let the walls between us

Collapse,
brick by brick....

“If
a person is faced with a choice between the Orthodox Church and Islam, in place
of confused and incomprehensible religious concepts (such as the Holy Trinity,
the threat of excommunication, entreaties to the Mother of Christ, the endless
worship of saints and their images), he will choose the one God and His
Prophet—namely, Islam. The final and greatest religion is Islam.” Even
today, authorities in Russia forbid the publication of Pushkin’s poetry on the
Koran and on Islam.

Roger Garaudy was the child of a French family.
He was the head of the Communist Party, the director of the Institute for
Marxist Research, a writer on Marxist philosophy, a member of parliament and a
senator, and even a candidate for the French Presidency. Sent to prison in
Algeria as a political agitator, he had the chance to study Islam at first
hand, an enterprise which took him some 40 years. In 1981, at the age of 68, he
announced to the world that he had become a Moslem, saying: “Islam is the
choice of the times. All the answers sought by man are in Islam. Islam is ahead
of our times. Since the Koran was revealed, it has always been in command of
time. Time itself may age, but the Koran will always remain youthful.”

Medical surgeon Dr. Maurice Bucaille, one-time
head of the Surgeons’ Department at the Paris Faculty of Medicine, became
acquainted with the Koran while treating King Faisal. After years of research
and study he wrote The Bible, The Koran
and Science, declaring that he had become a Moslem and observing: “The
incomparable miracle that is the knowledge within the Koran is beyond doubt and
of an astoundingly high sophistication. It is the proof of a true miracle.”

Marcel Boisard, in his book Islam and Humanism (1979), writes on
“The Status and Equality of Women”: “The Koran addresses both men and women.
Islamic law is generally oriented towards protection. It fully delineates
women’s rights. It attaches the greatest importance to the protection of women.
According to the Koran and the Prophetic Traditions, men must behave towards
their spouses with equity, goodness and understanding. In spiritual terms, marriage
elevates humanity to a higher state. A woman’s position is strengthened by the
precautions of Law. Women’s rights are sacred before the Law; they have
equality, as well as the right to their own property and inheritance.”

Recently, Prince Charles of England had words
of high praise for Islam: “Mediaeval Islam was a religion of remarkable
tolerance for its time, allowing Jews and Christians to practice their
inherited beliefs, and setting an example which was not, unfortunately, copied
for many centuries in the West. The surprise, ladies and
gentlemen, is the extent to which Islam has been a part of Europe for so long,
first in Spain, then in the Balkans, and the extent to which it has contributed
so much towards the civilization which we all too often think of, wrongly, as
entirely Western. Islam is part of our past and present, in all fields
of human endeavour. It has helped to create modern Europe. It is part of our
own inheritance, not a thing apart.”

All of which indicates that the road of reason
is one.

The Glorious Koran is the word of God. It is a
miracle revealed to the Prophet Mohammed, the final messenger—the Lantern of
Faith for People of the Heart. As the culmination of all revealed religions,
Islam embraces all that humanity is capable of knowing and experiencing.

In accordance with the verse: “Invite everyone
to the Way of your Lord, with wisdom and good counsel” (16:125),
it is with the deepest sense of humility and gratitude before our Creator that
we invite those who lack faith—or whose faith lacks perfection—to investigate
Islam, in the light of reason and the Koran. For as God Almighty declares, this
is the Religion of Truth, even though there may be those who detest it (61:9).

In examining Islam, do not pass judgment on the
basis of its adherents—to err is human, and a bad driver is no excuse for
blaming a good car. Nor should it be judged solely on the basis of its history,
for while this is full of shining, outstanding examples, it does not explain
much about the religion itself. It is on its own merits that a religion should
be judged—what it can do for you,
yourself, here and now and in the future. For this it is essential to examine
the principles and details of the religion in an unbiased manner: are these
positive, uplifting, leading to worldly and afterworldly happiness, or not? It
is due to the scarcity of unbiased source material on the subject in the West
that this work has been prepared, with a view to compensating at least a small
part of this information gap. The antics of petty dictators, prejudices, and
the fact that Islam has a bad press in the West should not deter a serious
person from discovering the facts.

May God’s mercy and bounty be upon us all.
Amen.

THE FAITH OF MAN

Prologue

Man and the universewhat exactly are they? The
two are like twins: two lovers that complete one another. Another way of
expressing this is that they are like a tree and its flower, its fruit.

Without Man, what would the universe do? And
without the universe, what would Man do? The two of them complement one
another.

That Man is the secret of the infinite worlds,
Almighty God has declared in all His sacred texts. God loved the universe, and
he made Man love it too.

You cannot love God, nor can you find Him,
without the attributes of Compassion and Mercy. Look and reflect upon this with
wisdom. Try to find the secret of Man. Love the universe if you want to become
fully human. Try to love the universe and find God.

God has stated: “I am Man’s secret, and Man is
My secret.” If you love God and His Prophet to the extent they deserve, you
will have solved the mystery of the universe, the secret of Mohammed and of all
His prophets. Be vigilant. Look deeply into Man and the universe and find it.

Is Man a guest to the universe, or is the
universe a guest to Man? By relying on Revelation, with reflection and with
Divine knowledge, you can find the answer to this question. Man and the
universe are one; both are worthy of exaltation.

Man and the universe are like two sides of a
leaf—they cannot be separated. But if we look at their current state, we see
that they both have cast aside love and are lost in a senseless
antipathy—avidly consuming one another. What we have witnessed since the first
man (The prophet Adam) is that these two good friends have become enemies. The
gold and silver and precious metals, the water and soil that the world yields,
humanity tries to consume by eating and drinking and clothing itself. The
universe that should be his beloved, Man treats as his enemy. As for the world
and the earth, they in their turn consume Man. Like rivals they consume one
another; neither of them are satisfied. And no one is even aware of this fact....

* * *

Who are you? Why are you here? Where did you
come from? Where are you going? What is your reason for being, and for being on
earth?

These are perennial questions that human beings
have always asked themselves. Science has been pretty successful in answering
the question: Where are you, what
kind of world do you live in? Technology has tackled the problem: Since and
while you’re here, how do you improve your living standards? Yet, the deeper
questions remain.

These questions are not merely matters of
abstract importance. The answers we give them also influence our immediate,
daily lives. Man is born free—free to act as he chooses. There are many
constraints laid by nature and society on our lives, but in many other respects
we are free to act as we please.

All actions, however, cannot be ranked as
equal. Some actions lead to happiness, while others lead to ruin—ultimately if
not immediately. So the further question naturally arises of how to conduct our
lives: how can we act so as to avoid eventual despair and achieve well-being?
How can we avoid building a house on quicksand?

It may come as a surprise that these questions
concerning our direct experience and the fundamental, abstract questions of our
existence should be related at all. Yet they are in fact inextricably linked.
The answers we give to one set of questions perforce influence and even
determine the other.

The existence of God—the one
and only Absolute Being not measurable by our categories of relative being and
nonbeing, the One without a Second, beyond all infinities and beyond even the
beyond—is the most fundamental truth about the universe, and it is this that
orders our lives properly.

Even the atheist derives his principles from
faith, and the scientist, when breaking new ground, is engaging in an act of
faith, as all his theories themselves rest on faith—his faith in the scientific
enterprise and the values that unify it.

The reason why God created the universe is that
He wished to be known: “I was a hidden treasure, and wished to be known, so I
created the world through love.” But the universe would not by itself be
sufficient to fulfill this purpose. What is needed is a sentient being: Man.
Only man, who possesses the highest consciousness, can realize God’s desire.
Hence, God created human beings as the noblest, the most honorable, of all
creatures, in order that they should recognize His existence, worship Him, and
through such worship, gradually come to know Him. “I created human beings only
that they should worship Me,” God has stated. Worship in this context is
synonymous with knowledge; it is the practice of techniques that draw us nearer
to God.

In order to attain knowledge of God, however,
one must first be in a state of ignorance. And this is precisely our situation
on earth. We are initially ignorant not just about God, but about the world we
live in. It is not easy to overcome this ignorance. Hence, God has endowed us
with tools by which we may do so. He has gifted us with consciousness, so that
we are aware of ourselves and the universe. He has granted us intelligence, so
that we can understand our world, and perceive His signs in the universe. Since
God is the most sublime truth about the universe, but because of that also the
most difficult to discover, He has provided us with guidance through members of
our own species to whom He has revealed some of His secrets—namely, prophets
and their successors, the saints. He has revealed the principles conducive to
our improvement by means of holy books relayed to us through the prophets. He
has thus provided us with firm guidelines that will save us from ruining our
destiny. And, finally, He has endowed us with the faculty of faith.

Since God cannot be compared to anything in the
universe (or out of it), experiencing His presence is not given to everyone.
Nevertheless, it is necessary to believe in Him if we are to live our lives
ethically and serve Him in realizing His purpose. And this is where man’s
innate capacity for faith comes in.

This human trait is so powerful that man
inevitably has faith in something if
not in its proper object, i.e. God. Because nature abhors a vacuum, this hollow
in human beings can be filled by almost anything—and it will inevitably be
filled. It has been filled with many things in the history of mankind. We are
at the beginning of wisdom when we realize that it should be devoted to its
rightful Owner.

The Meaning of the Four Books

God has revealed His prescriptions for humanity
in four major holy books. Of these, the Torah was revealed to Moses, the Psalms
to David, the Gospel to Jesus and the Koran, to Mohammed. In addition, Islamic
tradition relates that earlier prophets also received revelation, not in the
form of complete books, but as sheets or pages. Adam received 10 pages, Seth
received 50, Idris (Enoch) received 30 pages and Abraham received 10 pages,
which add up to a total of 100 Pages.

Two things are common to these Four Books and
100 Pages. The first of these is the emphasis on One God. The second is the
Golden Rule: “Do as you would be done by.”[8]
The connection between the two may perhaps be outlined as follows:

1.All things have been created by the One
God.

2.All things stand in the same relation to
God, their Creator.

3.All things stand under the same ethical
law.

4.You, too, have been created by God.

5.What is an ethical law for you is an
ethical law for all beings.

6.The treatment that pleases (or displeases)
you will please (or displease) all creatures.

7.Therefore, do unto other beings as you
would like them to do unto you.

The Existence and Unity of the One Creator

In the face of nature, it is easy for man to deify
what he sees before him, and yet primitive peoples in general have had a
supreme deity above all their other deities. In ancient Egypt, the concept of
One God was reached centuries after Akhenaton’s abortive attempt at monotheism.
In their pantheons of gods, the Greeks and the Romans had a supreme God which
they called Zeus and Jupiter, respectively. The mistake in these cases arose
from assigning importance to anything other than One God.

Among world religions, only in the East is
nontheism to be found. Early Hinayana Buddhism did not deal with the concept of
God at all. But this has to be understood in light of the fact that at the time
when the Buddha began to preach, there were two
million Hindu gods in India; just as there are still eight million kami, or gods, in Japan. Against this
backdrop, it is not at all surprising that the Buddha found it ill-advised to
express his ideas within a theistic framework. (A short while later, the deity
concept was reintroduced with the emergence of Mahayana Buddhism.) A
hyperinflation of gods, then, can lead to the rejection of them all as a
backlash. The first (negation) part of the formula: “There are no gods, only
God exists” is actualized, without realization of the latterthe affirmativepart
(“only God exists”).

The history of man is really the history of
faith. The founders of thought, of science and of society all drew on their
faith in God Almighty. Philosophers and scientists of all nations and across
all the centuries have reflected on the unity and existence of God, on the
limitations of their own existence, and have come to realize God’s unity and
omnipotence, as the following testify:

Socrates:
“God alone is wise, and ...he
intends to show that the wisdom of men is worth little or nothing.”

Plato:
“God desired that all things should be good, and nothing bad, as far as
possible.”

Aristotle:
“God is a living being, eternal, most good, so that life and duration
continuous and eternal belong to God; for this is God.”

Leibniz:
The universe as a whole must have a sufficient reason, which must be outside
the universe. This sufficient reason is God. “There is, therefore, or there can
be conceived, a subject of all perfections, or most perfect Being. Whence it
follows also that He exists....”

Locke:
“The idea of a Supreme Being, infinite in power, goodness and wisdom, whose
workmanship we are, and on whom we depend; and the idea of ourselves, as
understanding, rational beings ...would
... place morality among the sciences capable of demonstration....”

Kant:
It is unjust that the virtuous should suffer. Since this often happens in this
world, there must be another world where they are rewarded after death, and
there must be a God to secure justice in the life hereafter.

Charles
Darwin: In spite of being a self-confessed agnostic in his later years, he
stated: “Another source of conviction in the existence of God
... follows from the ... impossibility of
conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity
for looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance
or necessity.” “In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an Atheist in
the sense of denying the existence of a God.”

Sir James
Jeans: It is impossible, he said, for chance to build the order of the
stars: “From the intrinsic evidence of His creation, the Great Architect begins
to appear as a pure mathematician.”

Newton: “This
being governs all things... as Lord over all; and on
account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God Pantocrator, or
Universal Ruler.”

Werner
Von Braun: The father of space science, he wrote: “...the vast mysteries of
the universe should only confirm our belief in the certainty of its Creator. I
find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the
presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it
is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science.”

Abraham Lincoln: Lamenting how we have forgotten God, he said: “We
have forgotten the gracious Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied
and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined in the deceitfulness
of our hearts that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom
and virtue of our own.”

There are thousands more such
examples of scientists and thinkers, of learned scholars, of writers and
statesmen from all traditions, all of whom, having faith in God’s Unity, show
how intellect and faith are not contraries—they are but counterparts that
complement one another.

The Islamic Faith

Speaking on the Islamic legacy to Europe,
Prince Charles has said: “We have underestimated the importance of 800 years of
Islamic society: a culture in Spain between the 8th and 15th centuries. The
contribution of Muslim Spain to the preservation of classical learning during
the Dark Ages, and to the first flowering of the Renaissance, has long been recognized.
But Islamic Spain was much more than a mere larder where Hellenistic knowledge
was kept for later consumption by the emerging modern world. Not
only did Muslim Spain gather and preserve the intellectual content of ancient
Greek and Roman civilization, it also interpreted and expanded upon that
civilization, and made a vital contribution of its own in so many fields of
human endeavour—in science, astronomy, mathematics, algebra (itself an Arabic
word), law, history, medicine, pharmacology, optics, agriculture, architecture,
theology, music. Averroes and Avenzoor, like their counterparts Avicenna
and Rhazes in the East, contributed to the study and practice of medicine in
ways from which Europe benefited for centuries afterwards.

“Islam
nurtured and preserved the quest for learning. In the words of the Prophet’s
tradition: ‘The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the
martyr.’ Cordoba in the 10th century was by far the most civilized city of
Europe. We know of lending libraries in Spain at the time of King Alfred... It
is said that the 400,000 volumes of its ruler’s library amounted to more books
than all the rest of Europe put together. That was made possible because the
Muslim world acquired from China the skill of making paper more than four
hundred years before the rest of non-Muslim Europe. Many of the traits on which
Europe prides itself came to it from Muslim Spain. Diplomacy, free trade, open
borders, the techniques of academic research, of anthropology, etiquette,
fashion, alternative medicine, hospitals, all came from this great city of
cities. Mediaeval Islam was a religion of remarkable tolerance for its time,
allowing Jews and Christians to practice their inherited beliefs, and setting
an example which was not, unfortunately, copied for many centuries in the West.
The surprise, ladies and gentlemen, is the extent to which
Islam has been a part of Europe for so long, first in Spain, then in the
Balkans, and the extent to which it has contributed so much towards the
civilization which we all too often think of, wrongly, as entirely Western. Islam
is part of our past and present, in all fields of human endeavour. It has
helped to create modern Europe. It is part of our own inheritance, not a thing apart.” (1996)

The eminent German theologian
Hans Küng has, in recent years, posed the question: “was Muhammad really a
genuine or a true prophet?” to which he has given the following answer:

Even orthodox Christians (or Jews), provided
they confront the facts with an open mind, cannot deny certain parallels:

·Like
the prophets of Israel, Muhammad
based his work not on any office given him by the community (or its
authorities) but on a special, personal relationship with God.

·Like
the prophets of Israel, Muhammad was a strong-willed character, who saw himself
as wholly penetrated by his divine vocation, totally taken up by God’s claim on
him, exclusively absorbed by his mission.

·Like
the prophets of Israel, Muhammad spoke out amid a religious and social crisis.
With his passionate piety and his revolutionary preaching, he stood up against
the wealthy ruling class and the tradition of which it was the guardian.

·Like
the prophets of Israel, Muhammad, who usually calls himself a “warner,” wished
to be nothing but God’s mouthpiece and to proclaim God’s word, not his own.

·Like
the prophets of Israel, Muhammad tirelessly glorified the one God, who
tolerates no other gods before him and who is, at the same time, the kindly
Creator and merciful Judge.

·Like
the prophets of Israel, Muhammad insisted upon unconditional obedience,
devotion, and “submission” (the literal meaning of “Islam”) to this one God. He
called for every kind of gratitude toward God and generosity toward human
beings.

·Like
the prophets of Israel, Muhammad linked his monotheism to a humanism,
connecting faith in the one God and his judgment to the demand for social
justice: judgment and redemption, threats against the unjust, who go to hell,
and promises to the just, who are gathered into God’s Paradise.

Anyone who places the
Bible, especially the Old Testament, alongside the Qur’an, and reads both
together, inevitably wonders: Don’t the three Semitic religions of revelationJudaism, Christianity, and Islamhave the same basis? And isn’t this
particularly true of the Old Testament and the Qur’an?...

...he
alone led the Muslims to the worship of the one God, who spoke through him: Muhammad, the Prophet.

The fact
is often overlooked that... according to the New Testament there were also
authentic prophets who came after
Jesus... the New Testament doesn’t bid us reject in advance Muhammad’s claim to
be a true prophet after Jesus and in
basic agreement with him...

...if we acknowledge Muhammad as a
post-Christian prophet, then to be consistent we shall also have to admit...
that Muhammad didn’t simply get his message from himself, that his message is
not simply Muhammad’s word, but God’s
word. (Hans Küng et al.,Christianity and the World Religions, New York, 1986, pp. 25-31.)

Many other scholars
from the Christian world have researched and examined Islam, testifying to the
wisdom of the Glorious Koran and the greatness of the Prophet Mohammed.

Fritjof Schuon, the acknowledged expert of
Grand Tradition in our time, has written: “if the Prophet had so
wishedsupposing Islam were the product of his mindhe could also have declared
himself the son of God; he could have declared the Arabs a people elect; he
could have founded a dispersed and dispersing cult which would have included
his own person, the Archangels, some pagan divinities and, possibly, one or
more of his wives, along with God; and he would certainly have done so if he had had the character still all too readily
attributed to him in the West. That he did not do so proves
in any case two things, namely a character of absolute integrity, and an
authentic message from God; both thingsthe human qualification and the divine
interventionare necessarily combined, for the Messenger must be in conformity
with the Message, he must in some manner anticipate it by his character and by
his gifts. ... the absolutely honest, simple, upright, disinterested and
generous personality of the Prophetwe speak as a historian and not as a
‘believer’reveals proportions that transcend the commonly human.” (Fritjof
Schuon, Christianity/Islam, 1985, p. 174-5, 177-8.)

One of the greatest thinkers of the 19th
century, Edward Gibbon, stated in his Decline
and Fall of the Roman Empire that the new faith brought by Mohammed was purged
of the skepticism of uncertainty, and that the Koran provides a magnificent
witness to the unity of God. In such statements he is supporting not only the
Prophet but also the Koran, God’s miracle. “It is not the propagation but the
permanency of his religion that deserves our wonder; the same pure and perfect
impression which he engraved at Mecca and Madina is preserved, after the
revolutions of twelve centuries by the Indian, the African and the Turkish
proselytes of the Koran... The Mahometans have uniformly withstood the
temptation of reducing the object of their faith and devotion to a level with
the senses and imagination of man. ‘I believe in One God and Mahomet is the
Apostle of God’ is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual
image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol;
the honors of the prophet have never transgressed the measure of human virtue;
and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within
the bounds of reason and religion.” (Edward Gibbon and Simon Ocklay, History of the Saracen Empire, London,
1870, p. 54.)

The Christian missionary, Rev. Bosworth Smith,
stated: “By a fortune absolutely unique in history, Mohammad is a threefold
founderof a nation, of an empire, and of a religion. The Quran is a book which
is a poem, a code of laws, a book of common prayer, all in one, and is
reverenced by a large section of the human race as a miracle of purity in
style, of wisdom, and of truth. It is the one miracle claimed by Mohammadhis
‘Standing Miracle,’ he called it; and a miracle indeed it is.” “He was Caesar
and Pope in one; but he was Pope without Pope’s pretensions, Caesar without the
legions of Caesar: without a standing army, without a bodyguard,
without a palace, without a fixed revenue. If ever any man had the right to say
that he ruled by the right divine, it was Mohammad, for he had all the power
without its instruments and without its supports.” (Mohammad and Mohammadanism, London, 1874, p. 92.)

In his History of Turkey, the famous French author and historian Lamartine
expresses his admiration for the Prophet of God in the following way:
“Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas,
restorer of rational dogmas; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of
one spiritual empire, that is Mohammed. As regards all standards by
which human greatness may be measured, we may ask, is there any man greater
than he?” (Histoire
de la Turquie,
Paris, 1854, Vol. 11, p. 277.)

The Englishman John Davenport, who emphasized
the justice of Islam and was a student of the history of world religions,
stated: “Islam has never interfered with the dogmas of any faithnever
persecuted, never established an inquisition. It offered its religion, but
never enforced it.”[9]Islam has introduced itself to the world, but
has never abased human beings by forcible religious conversion, court trials or
the torture of the Inquisition. For this reason no less than for the beginnings
of science in the modern sense,[10]
says Davenport, the West owes much indeed to the Moslems.

“The acceptance of Islam,” he observes,
“conferred equal rights”. Thus the concept: “Human beings are equal” was first
introduced to the Western world through the stimulus of Islam. He continues:

“Europe is still further indebted to the
Musalmans. For, not to mention that to the struggles during the Crusades we
mainly owe the abolition of the onerous parts of the feudal system, and the
destruction of those aristocratic despotisms on the ruins of which arose the
proudest bulwark of our liberties, Europe is to be reminded that she is
indebted to the followers of Muhammad, as the link which connects ancient and
modern literature; for the preservation, during a long reign of Western
darkness, of the works of many of the Greek philosophers; and for the
cultivation of some of the most important branches of science, mathematics,
medicine, etc., which are highly indebted to their labours. Spain, Cassino, the
Salernum were the nurseries of the literature of the age; and the works of
Avicenna, Averroes, Beithar, Abzazel and others gave new vigour and direction
to the studies of Western scientists. ... Muhammad himself said that a mind
without erudition was like a body without a soul, that ‘glory consists not in
wealth but in knowledge;’ and he charged his followers to seek learning even in
the remotest parts of the globe.” (John Davenport, Muham­mad and Teachings of the Quran, 1869, pp. 61-2, 70-71.)

The famous American psychoanalyst, Jules
Masserman, in stating his views on leadership (Time magazine, July 15, 1974), reached the following conclusion:
“The greatest leader of all time is Mohammed” among historical personages. In
spite of being Jewish, he assigned Moses to second place, which is quite
extraordinary. Again, Michael H. Hart, the American astronomer, historian and
mathematician, accorded Mohammed first place in his 572-page book: “Muhammad...
was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious
and secular level.” (The 100: A Ranking
of the Most Influential Persons in History, New York, 1978, p. 33.)

Sir James Jeans, the famous physicist and
author of The Mysterious Universe,
whose words have already been quoted above, was a devout churchgoer. Yet when
told about the Koranic verse: “Among His servants, only men of knowledge
(scientists) fear God” (35:28), he exclaimed: “This is terrific! At the end of
fifty years of scientific investigations and observations, I was forced to
believe in God, to love Him and fear Him. An uneducated person living 1400 years
ago could not have uttered these words. If the truth you mention is in the
Koran, it must be the Book of God, and Mohammed must be a prophet. This is what
I believe, you may write this.”

Edouard Montet, professor at the University of
Geneva, says in his introduction to his work A Translation of the Meanings of the Glorious Koran: “If we were to
choose only one of the invaluable reforms that the Prophet Mohammed introduced
to humanity—forbidding the practice of burying female children alive—this would
be enough to place his service to humanity at the forefront of the annals of
history.”

Roger Garaudy was the child of a French family.
He was the head of the Communist Party, the director of the Institute for
Marxist Research, a writer on Marxist philosophy, a member of parliament and a
senator, and even a candidate for the French Presidency. Sent to prison in
Algeria as a political agitator, he had the chance to study Islam at first
hand, an enterprise which took him some 40 years. In 1981, at the age of 68, he
announced to the world that he had become a Moslem, saying: “Islam is the
choice of the times. All the answers sought by man are in Islam.”

Islam and You

The Koran clearly declares: “There is no
compulsion in religion: Truth now stands clear from error. Whoever rejects evil
and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handle that never breaks”
(2:256).

Can you truly say that what you already “know”
about Islam is based upon an unbiased
and informed judgement and not upon
misinformation? Is it based on the teachings of the Koran, and on the example
set by the Prophet Mohammed?

This is said to you out of genuine love: of
Truth and of humanity.

A tradition of the Messenger of God declares:
“Mankind are all the individuals of one family. The whole of humanity is God’s
household, and the most valuable and auspicious of them are those who do good
for humanity.”

May His Mercy and Bounty be upon us all. Amen.

AH, COURTESY

(O Mankind: if you wish to love God and journey to God, enter with
courtesy and try to exit with wisdom in all your dealings, whether physical or
spiritual. The following sayings regarding courtesy, or splendid moral conduct,
have been culled from the Traditions of the Prophet and the aphorisms of the
great saints.)

“My Lord made me courteous, and endowed me with
the best courtesy.”

“If a person has no trace of courtesy, he is
not human.”

“The difference that sets man apart from the
animals is courtesy.”

“A mind unadorned with courtesy is a hero
without a weapon.”

“Courtesy is the outer appearance of
intelligence.”

“Courtesy is to be in control of one’s hand,
one’s tongue, and one’s [sexuality].”

“Who visits with courtesy will return laden
with gifts.”

“The beginning of all courtesy is to speak
little.”

“Courtesy is the guide and sign of the Friends
of God. It is the cause of communion with God.”

“Without courtesy, nobility is naught.”

“Courtesy is a weapon that kills the devil.”

“Courtesy is the greatest art. It is food for
the road that leads to God.”

“Courtesy is the beginning of everything. The
whole of Sufism is courtesy.”

“Courtesy is the first requirement of
perfection.”

“He who abandons courtesy is not a wise man.”

“Fortify courtesy, renounce all else.”

“Those who lack courtesy are driven from God’s
doorstep.”

“Who lacks courtesy has no trustworthy
knowledge.”

“Command is above courtesy.” [I.e., when there
is a contention between a command and the requirements of courtesy, the command
takes higher priority.]

“Truth is nothing but courtesy.”

“True courtesy is to renounce the lower self.”

“Cloak your shame with courtesy.”

“True beauty is beauty of knowledge, and
courtesy.”

“The adornment of man is his courtesy in its
entirety.”

“An orphan is not one whose father has died,
but one who lacks knowledge and courtesy.”

“He who fails to teach courtesy to his children
will please his enemies.”

“Spiritual elevation is only possible with
courtesy.”

“The intelligent person learns courtesy from
the discourteous.”

“With the honor of knowledge and courtesy, Adam
was raised above the angels.”

“Satan was banished from God’s presence because
he abandoned courtesy.”

“Discourteous acts interrupt enlightenment, and
drive their owner from the heart of the King.”

“The discussion [of sages] is a body. The
spirit of that body is courtesy.”

“In order to attain to Truth, one needs
Knowledge of Certainty; for Knowledge of Certainty, one needs sincere deeds;
for sincere deeds, one needs to perform the Obligations of God; for this, one
needs to follow the Way of the Prophet; and in order to do this, one needs to
observe courtesy.”

“Courtesy is to possess the knowledge and
principles that protect man from all error.”

“He who has not been trained by the Sufis
cannot understand the truth of courtesy.”

“Everything loses value as it increases. But
when courtesy increases, it becomes more valuable.”

“Courtesy is: not to overvalue one’s superiors,
and not to belittle one’s inferiors.”

“He who does not adopt the courtesy of his Master
cannot adopt the courtesy of the Prophet’s Way and Traditions. And he who does
not adopt these cannot adopt the courtesy of the Koran and its sacred verses.”

“Those who enter their Master’s presence with
courtesy will earn boundless enlightenment from him.”

“Those who serve their Master courteously earn
stations as high as the Throne from him.”

“As long as one does not adopt the courtesy of
Masters, it is not possible to gain anything from them.”

“Beauty of courtesy frees a person from the
need for relatives.”

“Courtesy makes a person sincerely loved.”

“Courtesy is the power that protects a person
from shameful things.”

“Courtesy is to act in accordance with the
Prophet’s Way.”

“There is no honor higher than courtesy.”

“The least of the rules of courtesy is for a
person to stop when he senses his ignorance and to remedy it.”

“He who would learn wisdom should act
courteously.”

“He who seeks to possess good deeds should seek
to learn knowledge courteously.”

“As long as the People of Love possess goodwill
in the matter of love, their courtesy begins to increase.”

“Courtesy is to train the self as necessary and
to decorate it with beautiful morals.”

O MANKIND

O sons of Adam, sons of Man, we have to obey
the commandments of God, who has created us. We must pay very careful
attention. Consider the following dialogue:

“O sons of Adam, human beings, do you fear God,
your Creator?”

“Yes, we have no refuge except Him.”

“Thank you for recognizing your Lord. God, who
has created us, has many commandments for us human beings. How do you stand
with respect to His orders?”

“We can’t fulfil them. We’re unable to carry
out His orders as we should.”

“Well then, do you love God, our Creator?”

“What else is there to love but God?”

“How are you with His orders?”

“We can’t perform them like we’re supposed to.”

“In that case, you’re lying on both counts. He
who fears God and loves God should prostrate himself to God. The faith and
creed of a person who does not prostrate to God is weak. Can you comprehend the
taste of a fruit without eating it, by imagination alone? To know and
understand God on an empty heart and dry words is a vain illusion. To believe
and have faith in God, to perform the Five Pillars of Islam and the Six Pillars
of Faith, is required of all. May God and God’s Prophet, Mohammed, help you.
Amen.”

From Adam—the first man and Prophet—to
Mohammed, the last Prophet, a Prophet has been sent to every period and every
society of mankind. In order to inform human beings He has created of His
commandments, God Almighty has addressed them via His Prophets. He has made
known the essence of these discourses and commands to His servants with Four
Great Books and 100 Pages. Through the Prophets, it has become incumbent on
every society to believe in God with a sincere heart and to carry out God’s
divine orders physically and spiritually. God’s commandments to humanity have
been proclaimed in the Psalms (revealed to David), the Torah (to Moses), the
Gospel (to Jesus), and the Glorious Koran (to Mohammed). (Earlier prophets have
received various divine pages that add up to a hundred.) God Almighty has not
concealed His material-spiritual Essence and Reality from His servants. It is
necessary to live humanly, thoughtfully and attentively.

INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORY OF PROPHETS

(The following excerpt from a book by a
noted Turkish historian takes a sociological approach to religion. While its
coverage of certain issues may be found controversial by some Moslems, the
clarity of its treatment is exceptional, and it was decided to leave the selection
as it appeared in the Turkish original of the present book.)

Foreword

All human beings belonging to the major
religions believe in the unity of God, His messengers, and their holy books.
The existence of religion can be observed in every society, from primitive
tribes through empires down to the democratic nations of our day. Religion
still lives on as a significant institution in the structure of society.

There has been no society without religion.
Societies that have known how to utilize the essence, rules, and requirements
of religion have been fortunate and prosperred. On the other hand, backward
societies, deviating from its essence and turning it into an exploited
institution, have fallen into misery and darkness.

Although religions are primarily systems for
contemplation, they have also introduced a moral philosophy and a social order.
In addition, they have influenced the liberal arts via religious ferment.

From the concept of the existence of God,
theology, such as Islamic theology, and mystical movements such as Sufism were
born. In the area of spirituality, religion built metaphysical edifices. In the
social field, it initiated bloody struggles in order to achieve equal civil
rights. In the arts, wonders were created as exemplified in religious music,
religious literature, in religious paintings, statues, and in architecture in
the form of magnificent temples. Religion also covers mythology. The legends
attributed to the prophets were known to everyone.

Using the methods of historical investigation,
I desired to study the effects of religious institutions on societies since the
beginning of mankind.

When I started preparations for this work, I
thought I would be studying the mythological legends of prophets, their
adventures, and stories related to heaven and hell. And there are indeed
various romantic episodes, loves, bloody struggles and mystical events in their
lives. Yet almost from the start, my views changed substantially as certain
points forced themselves on my attention.

The first and perhaps the most significant of
these points is that humanity’s greatest struggle has been for morality. The
most exacting struggles of prophets have occurred in the moral field.

The second point is the concept of Right. In
every century of history, human beings have been exploited by kings, by feudal
lords, priests and the rich. In their struggle against oppression, people have
been led either by prophets or by their successors. Utilizing one of the
strongest feelings, namely, religion, these have managed to rally thousands of
people to their cause. New religions were born, new holy books arrived, new
religious injunctions became canonical law. In this way, Divine Law was
established. Struggles have accompanied efforts to obtain these rights, and
blood has been shed.

The richest source for prophetic history is the
Old Testament. The Torah, which constitutes its first five books, is a holy
book describing the lives of prophets. Information concerning prophets can also
be found in the Koran, and is scattered throughout the religious literature. My
task was to collate these into one book.

Prophets not mentioned in heavenly books have
also come to mankind and established religions. Notable among such exceptions
are Hermes (Thoth), who founded a religion in ancient Egypt; Confucius, who
attracted millions in China; Buddha, the founder of Buddhism and perhaps the
greatest religious luminary of India; and Zoroaster, the founder of Mazdeism in
Persia. I found it instructive to write about the concepts of these great men
of religion and their notions concerning God. Perhaps they are not prophets in
the ordinary sense of the word, but they are, nevertheless, great personalities
who have managed to attract millions of people to their teachings.

Men have felt duty-bound to learn about all the
prophets mentioned in heavenly books, about their lives, ideas, and adventures,
and have memorized their experiences. Down to this day, men of religion have
written the biographies of prophets and have mythologized them. Indeed, their
lives have come down to us largely in the form of mythology. Hodjas have
recounted their tales in mosques, priests have expounded them from the pulpit.
Artists have embodied scenes from their lives in paintings, while novelists
have written literary works about them.

The lives of the most famous prophets have
become the common heritage of mankind. No Moslem or Christian would fail to
know of Abraham, Joseph, Noah’s Ark, Lot, or Ishmael.

The history of prophets is at the same time a
history of religious and social struggles. Through the ages, men have fallen
into immorality, robbed and killed each other, and worshiped animals and
stones. Social orders have been ruined, human beings have chosen ill-advised
paths ending only in despair. It is the prophets who have guided people to the
right way in God’s name. These great men have suffered all kinds of cruelty,
and yet have endured in their struggles with God-given inspiration. After
Moses, first Jesus and then Mohammed have succeeded in binding people to the
greatness of God within a meaningful framework.

I have respected the beliefs of religious
people in this work, and have not violated basic sensibilities. Being a
historian, however, I tried to discover truth by taking an historical approach.

I have written a historical work, not a
religious one. This is the right way. For the study of the past is such a vast
field of knowledge that it encompasses the history of the entire universe.
Human history is but a small part of the latter. In short, history is a mirror
of the universe, a mirror for humanity. Man discovers his soul in that mirror,
he observes his good and evil aspects therein. For this reason, the past is an
ocean; the universe and mankind find life within it.

Just as every nation, every science, every art
has a history, so too does every religion and prophet. And hence I have written
the history of prophets in this work. If, reading it, you conceive some
affection for me in your heart, however small, that then shall be my reward.

Religion

In creating man, God endowed him with three
gifts: Intelligence, Conscience and an appreciation for Beauty. These three
properties are found neither in inanimate things nor in plants. God has
withheld them from other creatures and bestowed them on man. Hence, human
beings have been called “the most honored of all creatures.” The presence of
these gifts has made human beings creative and constructive.

Among living beings, animals possess neither
intelligence in the human sense, nor conscience, nor aesthetic sensibility.
They maintain their existence by instinct alone, striving to further their
lives and propagate their species. They cannot build houses to protect them
from the elements, nor produce light to escape the darkness of night. They
possess neither the means to warm themselves nor a conscience towards their own
kind. The strong prevail over the weak. They have no characteristics such as
compassion, morality and charity. Further, they do not enjoy the beauties of
nature. Animals do not distinguish colors, they feel. They cannot discern the
hues of sunrise and sunset, nor gaze in wonder at them. They cannot appreciate
works of art. All these gifts have been given to man alone.

The most important gift in the possession of
man is intelligence: the power to reason. The mind gives rise to thoughts. From
the first day of his creation, man has observed nature with admiration. He has
watched the sunrise and sunset, the night, moon and stars, with keen interest.

What power creates these phenomena? Who
controls and guides them? Man conceives that the whole universe is sourced by a
divine being; he feels fear and awe towards this tremendous being, and begins
to respect Him. He feels gratitude to this being because of the gifts He has bestowed.
And so, in trying to understand the phenomena occuring in the universe with his
intelligence, the concept of God is born in man. In his soul he bears the
greatest respect for Him. From this concept of God, in turn, the institution of
religion was born. This feeling began with the first human being, for God has
endowed even the most primitive man with intelligence.

The first man was naked; he was covered with
hair, yet he was a human being. He was initially created with intelligence,
conscience and aesthetic appreciation, but had not yet formed societies. He
foraged bird eggs, fruit and caterpillars; he hunted animals and caught fish.
It took man thousands of years to advance from this primitive state. The first
human societies formed were clans. Together with society, six social
institutions appeared: language, morals, law, economy, religion and the arts.
Among these, religion has had the deepest effect on society.

Man gradually arrived at the notion of one God.
At an early stage, human beings living in fear ascribed divinity to animals
that suddenly loomed before them in adverse moments. This period of religion
has been called totemism, where the totem is an animal or a tree. Animism
marked the period of transition to the worship of ancestral spirits. In earth
naturalism, man worshiped the earth, mountains, springs and rivers considered
holy. In sky naturalism, the sun, moon and stars were idolized. Shamanism
emerged in Central Asia and spread westward. It occupied an important place in
human history and the history of religious thought.

These early religions were followed by the
period of monotheism, or worship of one God. The Greeks and Romans fostered
polytheism—the worship of many gods, also referred to as paganism. Finally,
however, religions based on one God triumphed. Unity of divinity is the final
form of faith. Belief in one God reached a high point with Abraham.

The intelligence of human beings resulted in
the concept of God, which in turn gave birth to religion. Philosophers have
defined religion in many ways in accordance with the ages they lived in, and
finally it has been defined as: “Religion is the comprehension of, and belief
in, a higher power above man of whom he stands in need.” Another definition is:
“Religion is man’s desire and love for the absolute Essence, which is
unknowable.” Religion sometimes means obedience and limitation, and sometimes
punishment. It means that as you punish, so will you be punished. It also means
the accounting on Judgment Day.

The following questions have influenced the
emergence of religion: “Who am I? Where did I come from, and where am I going?
What is this world of objects that surrounds me? How was it formed?” When he
was unable to answer these questions, man comprehended a power acting over
everything, and thus conceived of God, out of which religion emerged. Man has
always had religious feelings. What air is for the body, religion is for the
spirit. Man has felt the Lord and comprehended Him, and experienced this as an
inner taste of conscience.

The institution of religion began with the
first human being. Hence, religion and man have lived as an inseparable pair.
Religion is an ingredient present in the constitution of man. It has advanced
in time to become a great institution and compendium of ideas. It has been a
perennial law to believe in the principles of religion and to act accordingly.
Religion has shown mankind the roads to happiness.

Religion informs us how God is to be worshiped.
The purpose of this worship is morality, the discrimination between good and
ill. It is the path of virtue. Religion has survived within the social
structure of societies as a most powerful institution.

Social life has been nurtured by certain
values. Ethics deals with goodness, art with beauty, science with truth, economy
with utility, and religion with the sacred.

Each religion has a god it worships, a prophet,
and a holy book. It also has temples, priests, and ceremonies related to
worship. These are all considered sacred. They occupy an exalted place in
society. To repudiate them is sacrilege, and those who do so become outcasts
from society.

Religion has social sanction. It lends
character to societies no less than to individuals; those who gain individual
character are also morally superior. As for social character, this is the
organization formed by prophets, and is called the “community.” Just as Jesus
gave rise to a Christian community, Mohammed gave rise to an Islamic community.
A “community” is a religious group of human beings that transcends national
barriers. It is the society of those who believe in a prophet and a book.

The organization of the religious community has
crystallized differently in different religions. In Catholic Christianity, the
Christian community has been constituted as a government. The emperor of this
government is the Pope, its ministers are the cardinals, and its governors the
bishops. In the case of Moslems, the community has been organized not as a
government, but as a religious university. This is why the religious
organization has been called the Church (ecclessia)
in Christianity, whereas it has been called “school” (madrasah) in Islam. Madrasah
is the old name for universities. These do not have a priestly leader; there
are only professors (mudarrises) who
give instruction.

Islam is a federation of universities. The
whole world of Islam is a university. This university has branches in every
city and town. The mufti in each town may be considered as the dean of that
branch. The “Sheikh of Islam” is the rector of all universities. From this, it
can be understood that in Islam, religion is based on an academic, not
governmental, jurisdiction.

The professors of Islamdom have culturally
elevated the community by giving instruction in shools on such subjects as
history, medicine, philosophy, logic and geometry. They have also taught
religious sciences such as the Koran, theology, jurisprudence, hermeneutics,
and the Prophet’s Traditions (sayings). This is also where the judges or qadis were educated. This shows the
extent to which Islam assigned importance to science, and how Islamic
civilization flowered.

Religions have also fostered advancement of the
arts. Religious architecture, in particular, has produced many magnificent
works. The grand mosques and cathedrals are all products of the religious
impulse. The religion of Islam has constructed mosques, schools, caravansarais,
libraries, mausoleums and fountains unmatched for their art.

Religious hymns have contributed to the field
of music. Religions have contributed to science by their works.

For all these reasons, religion is a tremendous
institution. It has forged civilizations. Scientists need to investigate
religion not merely in terms of faith, but as a social institution. When this
is done, it becomes clear that religion is necessary and of immense utility.

God

Prophets are the great teachers of religions
and the envoys of God; they have founded religions. In order to comprehend
their emergence, it is first necessary to understand what religion is. Most religions
have involved belief in the unity of God, His existence and His role as
Creator. How, then, was the notion of God born in the human spirit?

Man has been created as a creature living in
space and time; the universe encompasses him. He lives under the influence of
cosmic phenomena. The sun rises and sets, night arrives, day follows it, years
go by, spring comes, flowers bloom; the blue sky darkens, clouds appear
bringing rain or snow. This is followed by summer; the weather warms, fruit and
vegetables ripen. While this background continues perpetually, man dies and
becomes dust.

Why has he come into this world, and why does
he become nothing? Where does he come from, and where is he going? Events
taking place in the universe influence him. All these occur within space. Man,
with his intelligence, considers all this. What is time? What is space? These
events continue perennially. Time, space, the endless succession of becoming,
and finally death... These are metaphysical thoughts that stagger human intelligence.
He thinks of the stupendous power that brings these events into being and
organizes them, the Great Architect of these worlds, and calls Him “God.”

We human beings cannot see God; we can only
infer His existence using our intelligence. But none of our thoughts are
sufficient to describe God. It is impossible for us to comprehend something
that is invisible, intangible and formless. An eternal being cannot be measured
temporally. Hence, the description of God is impossible. We cannot see His shape.
We can only discover His existence by reasoning with our minds. God exists, and
He is One. This has been a common conception of humanity.

God exists in the heavens and the earth. He
creates, destroys, gives life and makes to die. Before all beings, He was, and
after everything passes, He will be. He is present in everything, visible or
invisible. He knows what will be born and what will die. He is all-seeing.
Nothing can be concealed from Him. To Him is due the light of our eyes, the joy
of our hearts. He is the ruler of heaven and earth. All creation is dependent
on Him; He is the Lord of the worlds.

He is the Creator of all that is. Every being
is an infinitesimal part of Him. By His leave, night darkens and day breaks.
From Him comes everything we intuit or know. He is the bestower of everything.
This is why mankind has believed in the existence and unity of God. This has
been an unchanging belief.

A person who contemplates God feels a sweet
reverberation in his conscience, an indescribable pleasure in the depths of his
being. Love for his Creator is conceived in his spirit. Billions of human
beings who fill the earth today believe in the existence of God.

There are few people who lack faith in God;
these are mostly materialists. Most scientists have believed in the power of
God. Upon discovering the laws of nature, those who deal with biology, physics,
chemistry, astronomy, etc. have been amazed at the manifestations of divine
creativity.

The functioning of the human body,
consciousness, the atoms and electrons of matter, the countless phenomena in
the heavens have delivered even the most confirmed materialists to faith. Even
if they call that which forms these conscious beings by the name of “nature,”
in most cases they are convinced that this can be nothing other than divine
power. They, too, have realized that the mysteries of the universe cannot be
unraveled by arid materialism. Such researchers have been compelled to believe
in a Creator and have postulated a being that exists beyond themselves and their
surroundings.

In order to believe in the existence of God, it
is enough to contemplate—with attention and admiration—the totality of the
cosmos, the stars in the sky, and how things on earth—beginning with one’s own
being—are formed. Once the delicate, perennial order governing the whole
universe is perceived, the existence of an eternal Creator organizing it
becomes apparent of itself.[11]
These are the reasons why the existence and unity of God have been believed in.

Moslems believe in God in the following way:
“God exists, He is One, He has no associate or equal, He is independent of
space. God is the Creator of all that is in the heavens and the earth, who
causes us to grow, watches over and protects us, who knows our pain and avenges
us, who sees our essence, who has formed everything out of nothing. He was not
born, nor does He bear. He is invested with the Attributes of Perfection, and
is beyond any Attributes of Imperfection. He is all-powerful and omnipresent.”

The Moslem faith in God is based on His
attributes. Moslems recognize two kind of attributes in God: Negative
Attributes[12]
and Positive Attributes.[13]

The Negative Attributes are attributes
predicated of God’s Essence—i.e., Essential Attributes. They are also called
Dissociative (tanzih) Attributes
because they belong to God alone. There are six Essential Attributes:

2.Eternal post-existence (baqa). God will have no end in time.
After all else has passed away, He alone will be (baqa literally means “survival”).

3.Existence, or Being (wujud ). God is infinite Being; true being belongs only to Him.

4.Unity or Oneness (wahdaniyah). God is nondual, nonmultiple, indivisible. This is not
a mathematical enumerability, such as the number “1” constitutes among an endless
sequence of numbers, but an all-comprehensive unity beside which nothing else
exists. God is One without a second.

5.God is unlike anything else that He has
created subsequently (muhalafah
lil-hawadith).

6.God stands by His own Self; He is
self-sufficient, without need of anything else (qiyam bi-nafsihi).

There are eight Positive Attributes, which are
also called Analogical (tashbih)
Attributes because of the analogies drawn with creation:

1.God is Alive, He is the Living God (hayah). This is the most comprehensive
Positive Attribute of God.

2.God is Omniscient, He is the All-knowing
and the possessor, as well as originator, of all science and knowledge (ilm). This attribute is second only to
“the Living.”

8.Creation or Genesis: God creates everything
where before there was simply nothing; He is the Creator of all creation (taqwin).

Not only does the
concept of God live on in minds and thoughts; it survives in the structure of
societies.

We learn of the existence of God through the
prophets and holy books. God has informed humanity of His Unity and His
commandments via the prophets, who may be considered as His ambassadors.

The Prophets

Human beings have believed in the existence and
unity of God, but they have not been able to see Him. God Almighty, however,
has allowed some of His servants He has chosen to glimpse His divine power. But
such elect persons cannot convey what they have seen and experienced to other
people. Nevertheless, they are given the task of conveying God’s commandments
to human beings. These are God’s envoys on earth. They are His messengers and
prophets.

After God, people have believed in His
prophets. The concept of God is a metaphysical notion. But human beings have
also felt the need to have a being who will teach and explain His existence to
them; they have sought His messengers. The most distinguished personalities
among them have brought news and commandments as prophets from God to human
beings. Together with God, people have also had faith in His prophets, who are
loyal, trustworthy, innocent and kind-hearted people. They have also displayed
superhuman powers. From the very first, the human race has bred great men of
religion, who have also brought sacred books.

In ancient history, Hermes (Thoth) appeared in
Egypt, Confucius in China, the Buddha in India and Zoroaster in Persia, the
religious concepts of whom have been very powerful. They have shown human
beings the ways of moral conduct and happiness, and all have established
religions. Those who believed in their ideas recognized them as Prophets.
Besides these great religious figures, God has sent 124 thousand prophets to
mankind, amongst whom the best known are: Adam, Seth, Idris (Enoch), Noah,
Hood, Saleh, Abraham, Ishmael, Lot, Jacob, Joseph, Job, Shuayb, Moses, Aaron,
Joshua, Elias, Elijah, David, Solomon, Dhulkifl, Ezra, Loqman, Zulqarnain,
Zachariah, John, Jesus, Mohammed.

Religious books speak about these prophets;
mankind has believed in them all, some of whom have brought holy books.

Human beings believe in prophets as follows: in
order to make His existence known, proclaim His greatness, and guide everyone
to the right way, God Almighty has bestowed prophethood on some of his
straightest, smartest, most dependable and truthful servants. He has, out of
His own power, produced miracles for them that cannot be replicated by anyone
else. In addition He has sent books to some of them. These prophets have in
turn informed their communities of God’s commandments. Indeed, all prophets are
the most honorable_e d_mnteln=selt of men, who have drawn people to themselves
by their superior morality and wisdom. Many were heads of state, bringing
morals and instituting legal order. They have performed great services for
humanity.

It is an article of religious faith to believe
in God and His prophets. The prophets are God’s beloved servants, to whom He
has revealed divine books by the intermediary of the Archangel Gabriel. He has
also given them the capability to display miracles and psychic feats.

Another characteristic of prophets is spiritual
Ascension. Mohammed was honored with seeing the pure Light of God at the height
of his Ascension.

Prophets have been created differently from
ordinary people. They can foresee and foretell many things in advance. Their
spiritual lives are very powerful. Through this strength, they have the
capacity to separate their spirits from their physical bodies and Ascend in the
spiritual world. This capacity manifests itself as veridical dreams and Divine
Attraction.

Some Europeans have claimed that prophets are
mediums, but they are not. Rather, they are personalities possessing Divine
Attraction. They are great and superhuman individuals. At the same time, they
are all saints of great intelligence and high morals. The religions they
founded still continue, with little of their force spent. Each prophet is a
moral philosopher. Mankind has believed in them wholeheartedly and respected
them.

The prophets have all lived frugally and
renounced worldly pleasures. Their lives have passed in the instruction of
human beings. They have suffered greatly as a result, but these august
personages have relentlessly striven to guide people to the straight path, the
path of God.

All prophets are men of knowledge and virtue.
They have been born and have lived and died like the rest of humanity. No
prophet is either God or God’s Son; they are only His servants. Their
difference, however is that they are God’s beloved servants.

The prophet of Moslems is Mohammed. All Moslems
love him sincerely, and have boundless respect for him.

(From E.B.
Shapolyo, The History of the Prophets.)

MOSES, JESUS AND MOHAMMED

Prologue

“Come on, son,” said the sage, “you don’t expect
to get anywhere by yourself, do you? The road is fraught with pitfalls, and no
one can make it on his own. Where did you get this notion: ‘If you meet the
Buddha on the road, kill him’? You can’t make the trip without a guide, and the
founder of a religion is the guide of all guides.”

“Was the Buddha a prophet too, sir?” the
disciple asked. He was well-meaning and polite, but young and a little foolish.

“He’s not mentioned in our Book by name,” said
the sage, “so we can’t say for sure. Legend has it that there have been 124
thousand prophets, only a few of whose names are known. The holy texts would
have to be some kind of phone book if they were to name them all. In any case,
the Buddha is widely recognized as nothing less than a founder of a religious
philosophy, and what applies to him certainly applies to the prophets as well.”

“I had this notion that I could go it alone,”
said the disciple. “I don’t want to get entangled in all this religious stuff.
Besides, I want to attain enlightenment, not the Christian notion of
salvation.”

“That’s absurd,” said the sage. “Besides,
liberation, salvation, enlightenment all mean the same thing. A rose by any
other name would smell as sweet.”

“Probably what is meant when they speak about
killing the Buddha,” observed the disciple, “is that one should stop at nothing
when on the road.”

“Perhaps. But it’s still extremely bad form to
speak of him in that way.”

The Prophets

“Tell me,” the sage asked, “is there anyone you
admire at all?”

The student thought for a moment, and gave the
name of a popular rock star.

“Not that I have anything against rock stars,
or indeed against movie stars or ball players or great statesmen,” said the
sage, “but you have to set your sights higher. A good deal higher.”

“You have come to me in search of Truth,” the
sage continued. “But I must warn you that your expectations about Truth will
prevent you from perceiving it. For Truth exists independently of anyone’s
perceptions about it; it is not your
truth or my truth, but the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, as they say.” He smiled.

The student pondered, but only for a few
seconds. “Sir,” he said, “having come this far, I think it’s my duty to lay
aside my preconceptions and hear you out, at least.”

“Very well,” replied the master. “Truth is One,
yet it presents many facets, like a polished diamond. One facet is science,
another philosophy. Art, music, literature are all aspects of Truth, and you
can probably think of others.

“In all ages,” he continued, “there have been
superior human beings who have enriched the heritage of humanity by their
attempts to get closer to the Truth. You’ve heard of Newton and Einstein, of
Plato and Socrates, of Michelangelo and Mozart and Goethe. These and others,
too numerous to do justice here, are veritable mountain tops when compared to
the common run of humanity.

“Our voyage, or rather yours, must begin with
the realization that there have been people in history who stand in the same
relation to these peaks as they, in turn, stand in relation to the rest of
humanity. The superior men I’ve named had to strive every inch of the way to
reach the pinnacle of a certain facet of Truth. Yet there have been others to
whom Truth has revealed itself, not through one of its facets, but directly.
Sometimes they, too, have striven greatly to achieve this vision. Sometimes it
has come upon them unexpectedly, all of a sudden. In all cases, however, the
vision they received has served the improvement and happiness not merely of
themselves, but hundreds of millions of human beings. These are the ones I
choose to call seed personalities:
out of whom great good has grown, who have galvanized countless people with
their presence.”

“This is the Age of Technology,” he went on. “Science
and technology are both aspects of Truth, and who can deny the boons they have
granted us? Yet at the same time, emphasizing them to the exclusion of
everything else has blinded us to many other things that our ancestors realized
much more clearly than we do today. As a result, everybody is lost—lost,
because we can’t find the golden thread to lead us out of the labyrinth. You
yourself, for instance, are tossed like a piece of driftwood on the high seas;
you feel like a leaf in the wind, being hurled wherever it blows. A person
needs to be anchored in something solid to survive the vicissitudes of life
without being fazed by them.”

He got up and removed a dusty tome from a
shelf. It was Heroes and Hero-Worship,
dated 1841, by Carlyle.

“Why don’t you read aloud the passages I
indicate to you, and we’ll take it from there,” he suggested. “I know the
language is a bit dated, but we’ll be well rewarded, you’ll see.” So the
student read:

The thing a man does
practically lay to heart, and know for certain, concerning his vital relations
to this mysterious Universe, and his duty and destiny there, that is in all
cases the primary thing for him, and creatively determines all the rest. That
is his religion: or, it may be, his
mere scepticism and no-religion: the
manner it is in which he feels himself to be spiritually related to the Unseen
World or No-World: and I say if you tell me what that is, you tell me to a very
great extent what the man is, what the kind of things he will do is.

Answering of this question is giving us the
soul of the history of the man or nation. The thoughts they had were the
parents of the actions they did: their feelings were parents of their thoughts:
it was the unseen and spiritual in them that determined the outward and
actual:—their religion, as I say, was the great fact about them.

“Skip a few pages and read on,” said the sage.
The student continued:

In all epochs of the
world’s history, we shall find the Great Man to have been the indispensable
saviour of his epoch;—the lightning, without which the fuel would never have
burnt. The History of the World, I said already, was the Biography of Great
Men...

Innumerable men had passed by, across this
Universe, with a dumb vague wonder, such as the very animals may feel; or with
a painful, fruitlessly inquiring wonder, such as men only feel;—till the great
Thinker came, the original man, the
Seer; whose shaped spoken Thought awakes the slumbering capability of all into
thought. It is ever the way with the Thinker, the spiritual Hero. What he says,
all men were not far from saying, were longing to say.

The disciple looked up. “Please don’t think it
rude of me,” he said, “but I’m worried about all the charlatanism, the broken
promises, the shattered dreams.”

“Ah,” said the sage, “Carlyle has the answer to
that, too. Don’t imagine he was uncritical, taking everything without a pinch
of salt. Give me the book.” He turned back a few pages and said, “Read.”

Quackery and dupery do abound:
in religions... but quackery was never the originating influence in such
things; it was not the health and life of such things, but their disease, the
sure precursor of their being about to die!

Quackery gives birth to
nothing: gives death to all things.

“That’ll be enough,” the sage said, and
replaced the book to its shelf.

“Man is always bound by his nature, his society
and his culture,” he resumed. “Animals, too, are bound by their natural
needs—and their social needs, if they happen to be social animals. But there is
something in man that strives to transcend the merely animal level of
subsistence—to exist, to be; to be
not simply an animal, which is what all animals are doing all the time anyway,
but to be a man. Today, living as we
do in such luxury as even the emperors of old never dreamed of, even today the
greatest part of our efforts are geared to the acquisition of mere creaturely
comforts.

“Now in history, there have been singular
moments when an individual has broken through to another level of being, or
that level has reached out and contacted him. As a result he has acquired a new
self, has been transformed into a person.
He breaks the bounds of his specific circumstances, natural and social, and
becomes—to a greater or lesser extent—a universal man, part of a universal
community.

“It is a fact, as astounding as it is singular,
that all such persons have testified to a separate reality, a different level
of being, even in cases where they did not speak about God as such.

“This person then feels it his obligation,
indeed duty, to inform his fellow-men of his discovery. Many recoil in horror
and incomprehension; but on a few open minds he makes an impression they will
never forget. He is the man they all sat down to supper with for many a night,
yet he is not the same man, somehow. For he has been transfigured by his
experience, and they have at last seen an example of something they never
expected to see: a Man.

“This person has now become an embodiment of
ideas, whether totally new, or venerated or long forgotten. And this embodiment
is so wonderful, so captivating, so lovable, that people who can sense this
difference seek to emulate the principles they see ensconced in every move,
every breath of this person, and by at first pretending, to become, in the end, like the person they
admire. And so, they are attracted to him like iron filings to a magnet.

“That is the kind of person I call a prophet,
or, if he is an accomplished follower of such, a saint.

“The prophet or saint superimposes on the
physical body and the social dimension of man an invisible force-field, a
subtle envelope, a new, purified self, within which man’s true nature might
flower. This envelope is the totality of his teachings. Yet those teachings are
none other than the expression in words of the reality that the prophet
embodies in real life. The prophet lives the life, in order that his followers
may know the doctrine; and in order to understand the doctrine, you too have to
live the life. For while the do’s and don’ts may be easy—and they aren’t always
so—not all aspects of the doctrine are readily comprehensible.

“And so, this person acts as a seed for
mankind, just as we use cloud-seeding in order to precipitate rain, or a ‘seed’
brings on the crystallization of a saturated chemical solution.”

“But sir,” protested the student, “the people
you’re telling me about all lived in ancient times. They were all shepherds,
and most of them didn’t even know how to read or write. How can such persons be
taken as examples in our day?”

“Too much book-learning is what makes you say
that,” replied the master drily. “Very well then, consider this: In our digital
age, we are fast approaching the point where, in the future, information may be
beamed directly and instantly into one’s brain. Now suppose that this were in fact
realized, would you consider reading books an inferior or a superior form of
information input?”

“Inferior, of course,” came the reply.

“Exactly. Now what I am talking about is very
similar to this.” He pointed to his head. “The Guarded Tablet is right here,”
he said. “If the Omniscient decided to impart to you a portion of His
knowledge, do you think He would necessarily need the medium of a book? He
would merely unlock a door of the Akashic Records, and that would be that. The
prophets of old may have been unlettered shepherds, but they had one great
advantage that we don’t—they had God behind them.”

Moses

“Moses,” he went on, “was one of the greatest
prophets. He lived in the 13th century BC, and conversed with God so much that
he earned the title: ‘Speaker with God.’ I shall not bore you with the details
of his life, since I assume you know them already. His birth, recovery from a
basket in the Nile, and growth under the nose of Pharaoh, his arch-foe; God’s
appearance to him in the burning bush; his contest with Pharaoh, and the Exodus
by which he led his people out of slavery; the parting of the Red Sea; God’s
delivery of Manna from heaven; Moses’ meeting with God on Mount Sinai for forty
days and nights; the forty years in the desert before they could enter the
Promised Land—all these, I’m sure, are too well-known to need repetition.”

“They generally are,” the student confirmed.

“Moses is an all-too-human figure. He is aware
of his shortcomings, especially his difficulties of speech, but that’s another
story—and a beautiful one, too,” the sage added, “remind me to tell you
sometime.”

“Okay.”

“Moses is also the pivotal figure in Jewish
history. He was more than a prophet; he was a messenger of God, meaning that he
was a lawgiver and not just a renewer of law earlier revealed. Moses hated
injustice, and may be considered the father of all earthly utopias. He was a
giant aqueduct through which the law and light of God poured into the minds and
hearts of his people. His actions were decisive, his resolve unshakable; yet at
the same time, he had to appear sterner than he was in order to hold his group
together.

“There was nothing Moses loved more than
communion with God, for at bottom he was a devoutly spiritual man. Great
historians have always recognized that mankind sometimes progresses by a giant
step, thanks to the earth-shaking influence of a seed personality. And Moses
was such a man. He effected a revolution of the mind and spirit, and brought
such a perspective on things that old ideas could never be the same again.

“The duties God charged Moses with were truly
gargantuan. He accepted them reluctantly, but tried with all his might to
fulfill the task set for him. And in his desperate struggle he succeeded,
though he never saw the Promised Land himself. The Torah is quite right to
conclude: ‘Never [before or] since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like
Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face. He was unequaled for all the signs and
wonders that the Lord sent him to perform in the land of Egypt, against Pharaoh
and his servants and his entire land, and [unmatched] for all the mighty deeds
and all the terrifying displays of power that Moses performed in the sight of
all Israel’ (Deuteronomy 34:10-12).”

“He was an imposing figure, all right,” the
disciple agreed.

“Yet there is another dimension to the Biblical
account that has escaped almost everyone,” the sage continued. “The whole chain
of events has by and large been read as history, and nothing more. But when you
look at it from an esoteric angle, the Exodus is also the sacred history of the
individual soul. Pharaoh is the pharaonic, egotistical self that holds the
spirit in slavery. The journey to the Promised Land is precisely what the Sufis
call ‘the journey to the homeland.’ And the trials in between, the forty years
in the desert, are the tribulations that the spirit undergoes along the way.”

“I hadn’t heard of that before,” said the
student.

“Let me just tell you this much,” said the
sage, “even the fact of Moses’ demise just when his people were about to enter
‘the land of milk and honey’ has deep esoteric significance.”

The student frowned. “What about Jesus?” he
asked.

Jesus

The sage smiled. “Jesus certainly needs no
introduction from me,” he said. “A
noted historian has observed,” he continued, “that Moses was beyond the power
of the human mind to invent, and I think the same thing may be said of Jesus.
Of course, his story has been embellished, because there is a dark tunnel of
about two decades after him that historians, in spite of all their efforts,
have been powerless to illuminate. Innumerable rumors flourished as a result,
some true and some spurious. Yet there had to be a Jesus, because he
complements Moses in so many ways.”

“How so?” asked the disciple.

“Well, Moses is by and large an exoteric
figure. Overemphasis on the purely legal aspect of his teachings had, by Jesus’
time, obscured any spiritual element they might have possessed originally.
Jesus had to come, in order to restore the spiritual dimension of man. Besides,
Moses is still a tribal prophet, and the decrees revealed to him are still
specific to a small segment of humanity. Jesus’ teachings, in contrast, were
destined to reach a much wider audience.

“Every action, every word of Jesus radiates
authority,” he went on. “So much, in fact, that those who have confused him
with God may perhaps be excused for doing so. Yet Jesus himself never claimed
to be God; in fact, he explicitly denied it: ‘Why do you call me good? Only God
is good’ (Matthew 19:17, Mark 10:18, Luke 18:19), or: ‘My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28), if you remember your Bible.
Even Paul, who made so much of Jesus’ end—not even Paul claimed that Jesus was
God, though he came dangerously close. When Jesus says: ‘I and my Father are
one’ (Jn. 10:30), therefore, he means
this in a metaphorical and not a literal sense, otherwise he would be
contradicting himself.”

“I’m not a theologian,” the student admitted.

“Nor do you have to be, it’s all there in the
Bible,” came the reply.

“Moses was the moralist, the judge, the
hygienist, whereas Jesus was the psychologist and mystic,” the sage continued
after a while. “Jesus was love, humility and sacrifice personified. These
qualities shone through all his actions, for he went about doing good. He
healed the sick: restored sight to the blind, speech to the dumb, the use of
their legs to the crippled. He helped the poor, freed the oppressed, fed the
hungry. Being a prophet of God, he did all these miraculously; but one does not
have to be a miracle-worker in order to do these things in one’s own small way,
with one’s limited human means, or to recognize that they are admirable virtues
in themselves.

“When we turn from Jesus’ deeds to his words,
the transparent meaning of his actions evaporates. That’s why they’ve been
debated for centuries. Some of his sayings are clear enough, and it would take
us a long way if we could practice even them alone faithfully. For example: “In
all things, do unto others as you would have them do unto you; for this is the
Law and the Prophets’ (Matthew 7:12).
Or: ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your
soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And
the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these
commandments hang the Law and the Prophets’ (Matthew 22:37-40). Note the reference to the Law (Heb. Torah) and the Prophets (Naviim) in both cases, which together
with the Books (Ketuvim) make up the
Old Testament. Jesus is here establishing his continuity with the tradition of
Moses, and his advice is clear and simple.

“But other sayings of his are quite complex. We
then have to discard any notion that he was a simple man preaching a simple
doctrine. Part of the problem is that people have tried to interpret his
sayings by applying the tools of Greek philosophy to them. When that was done,
the pure, clear life-water of his teachings became frozen into the stark
stalactites and stalagmites of dogma—whereas the only way to understand them is
to take the mystical approach.

“One example should suffice: ‘He who loses his
life shall find it’ (Matthew 10:39, Luke 9:23-4, John 12:25). Here, if anywhere, is an esoteric statement belonging
to Jesus. Now what do you suppose he meant by this paradoxical remark?”

“What, indeed?” echoed the disciple.

“Well, let’s apply the tools of Islam to it and
see what we come up with. This refers to the death-rebirth experience of the
soul. A saying attributed to Mohammed puts it more clearly: you have to ‘Die before
you die,’ for unless one dies and is reborn, one cannot enter the Kingdom. This
Kingdom of God—or Heaven—is the spiritual counterpart of the Promised Land
which we were talking about (also the ‘Pure Land’ of Amida Buddhism, if memory
serves) and, as everyone knows, ‘is within you’ (Luke 17:21).

“Now how is this to be achieved? The Bible
states that Jesus ‘emptied himself’ (Gk. ekenosen),
in order to let God’s light shine through (Philippians
2:7). For the thoughts, the desires, the caprices of the ordinary self only
obstruct that light. Self-emptying (kenosis)
leads to Unity or Union (enosis), in
other words. Now this is precisely the perception of Unity or Union (Ar. wahdah) of the Sufis, which is achieved
through (spiritual) poverty (faqr).
‘Poverty is my pride,’ said Mohammed, yet at another time he remarked: ‘Poverty
is blackness of face (i.e., a disgrace).’ It’s clear that he’s speaking about
two different kinds of poverty: spiritual poverty in the first case and
material poverty in the second. And what does Jesus say to that? ‘Blessed are
the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven’ (Matthew 5:3). The explanation and the explained fit each other like
hand and glove.

“This goes to show that only a mystical, Sufic
interpretation will explain some of Jesus’ sayings. But we can’t all be
mystics, so that door will remain closed to a great majority of people.”

“I’ve never heard of this connection between kenosis and enosis made before within Christianity,” observed the student.

“Probably,” the sage smiled, “this is because
Christian theology focused on the uniqueness of Jesus, rather than the
availability of his experience to all adepts.”

“Does this mean that the Sufis took their
doctrine from Christianity, as some have claimed?” asked the student.

“It means,” corrected the sage, “that Mohammed
took what was Jesus’ and completed it, just as Jesus said he would. If we love
Jesus enough, we should take heed of his directions.”

A Question

“Why is it,” said the sage, “that intelligent
people lament ‘the spiritual vacuum that exists all over what once was
Christendom’? And what is the reason for the unsettling, ominous silence that
echoes down church corridors through the centuries?”

“Search me,” said the disciple. A shiver ran up
his spine.

“Let me put this another way,” said the sage.
“Have you read your Umberto Eco?”

“No, but I’ve seen the movie,” replied the
disciple, remembering The Name of the
Rose.

“That book ends with the sentence: ‘Once there
was a rose. Now, there is only its name,’“ said the sage. “Do you have any idea
what this rose is?”

“No.”

“It is Jesus,” the sage continued. “And every
prophet is a rose. Moses, Jesus, Mohammed are all roses. The saints in a
religion are roses, too, but lesser roses than its prophet.

“The reason that we cannot smell the fragrance
of Jesus is that his term is over. His time is up.”

“How do you mean?” asked the disciple.

“Well, look at it this way. Suppose you’re an
American, or an Englishman, or a Frenchman, or a German. We all know that
Eisenhower, Churchill, de Gaulle and Adenauer were great leaders of these
nations.

“Now suppose you wanted to write a petition to
your president or prime minister. And suppose you began your letter: ‘Dear Mr.
Eisenhower,’ or ‘Dear Mr. Churchill,’ or ‘Dear Monsieur de Gaulle,’ or ‘Dear
Herr Adenauer,’ and sent it off. What do you think would happen?”

The disciple laughed. “I don’t know,” he said.
“It’ld probably end up in the wastebasket.”

“Exactly,” said the sage. “And why? Because
none of these people are in office any longer. You would have to address your
present prime minister or president in order for your petition to be considered
valid.

“Now it’s exactly the same thing with the
prophets,” he continued. “If you remember, Jesus said: ‘I am the way and the
life. No one comes unto the Lord, except by me.’ And well he might, for this
statement is true of all prophets, so
long as they are in office. In Abraham’s time, for instance, no one could
go to the Lord except by Abraham. In Moses’ time, no one could go except by
Moses, and so on. In every age it’s the prophet of that time that’s going to
ferry you to the other shore, and once you get there, the customs inspectors
say: ‘Who’s your ferryman?’ It’s all right to answer Moses or Abraham if you
lived in their term, but not if you haven’t.

“Each prophet is in office until the next one
comes along. It doesn’t matter if a prophet is alive or not when his successor
arrives. However, since no prophet will come after Mohammed save the fakes and
impostors, he will be in office till the end of time. There will be no further
Revelation, because God has stated His case to humanity in the final form He
desired.”

“Does this mean that only Mohammed’s community
is eligible for salvation, that all the earlier religious communities were
somehow inferior?”

“Not at all. Each prophet was the spiritual—and
sometimes also the worldly—king of his age, and as long as his people obeyed
him, they were assured of God’s grace. Every religion is the Islam of its age.
Judaism is the Islam of its time, Christianity is the Islam of the Christian
Era, and so on. They may differ from the final version—Islam as we know it—in
detail, but not in the essential points. Mohammed’s distinction resides in the
fact that his message addresses not this or that tribe or community, but
humanity at large. Because it was so universal, there is no need for another
prophet to come with further revelation. Of course, the final revelation
abrogates earlier revelations, just as today’s newspaper supersedes yesterday’s
daily, or the current version of a computer program updates its earlier
versions. This doesn’t mean the earlier versions are bad or all wrong, they’re
just out-of-date.”

“I don’t know, sir,” said the disciple. “It
would be better if Jesus had left some indication about his successor.”

“Oh, but he did. He said: ‘As long as I am in
the world, I am the light of the world’ (John
9:5). ‘And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, to be
with you forever’ (Jn. 14:15). “The
Paraclete... will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said
to you’ (Jn. 14:26). ‘When the
Paraclete comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the spirit of truth
who comes from the Father, he will testify on my behalf’ (Jn. 15:26). ‘It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do
not go away, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him
to you’ (Jn. 16:7). ‘I still have
many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the spirit of
truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his
own, but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things
that are to come. He will glorify me, because he will take what is mine and
declare it to you’ (Jn. 16:12-14).”

The sage paused. “Jesus,” he said, “could not
have given a clearer indication that he would have a successor. I myself
couldn’t have said it better if I had wanted to. First of all, note that there
are two Paracletes, not one: because Jesus says ‘another Paraclete’ like
himself, he is one and Mohammed is the other. Further, the Bible explicitly
calls Jesus ‘a Paraclete’ (1 Jn.
2:1), so that there are, presumably, other Paracletes—and ‘Paraclete’ now
begins to sound an awful lot like ‘prophet’. Let’s not go into the deeper
matter of what ‘Paraclete’ means; let me just say that I would again be
vindicated.

“Jesus calls the Paraclete the ‘spirit of
truth’; indeed, Mohammed was a spirit of truth, just like Jesus. Jesus makes it
plain beyond words that his teaching is incomplete and will be completed by
another like him. When he came, Mohammed gave instructions on all the things
that Jesus, on his own admission, could not elaborate. He dictated the Koran
just as he heard it, without addition or omission. As the Koran itself points
out, he did not speak of his own accord (53:3). And because he guided us into
all the truth, he will be with us forever, for God’s Revelation is now
complete. Moreover, Mohammed both testified on Jesus’ behalf and glorified him,
for he called Jesus ‘my brother’, which also dovetails with the notion of two
Paracletes. And the Koran glorifies Jesus as the Messiah (Christ) son of Mary
(5:72,75).”

The disciple mused. “I don’t know,” he said. “I
thought the Paraclete was the Holy Spirit. It says so in the Bible.”

“Don’t forget,” countered the sage, “that the
Paraclete is another Paraclete, just
like Jesus. There are two Paracletes, not one, and one of them is Jesus.
Whatever Jesus was, the other has to share the same characteristics. If Jesus
was a human being, the Paraclete has to be a human being, too. If Jesus was a
prophet of God, then so is the Paraclete. If you can speak about Jesus as a
spirit that is holy, which I can readily grant, one can say the same thing
about Mohammed. The point is that each of them is a holy spirit, not the
Holy Ghost.

“There’s another thing,” he continued. “When
Jesus appeared to the disciples later on, he breathed on them and said to them,
‘Receive the Holy Spirit’ (Jn.
20:22). This shows that the Holy Spirit either is Jesus’ breath, or is contained in his breath. In either case,
the Holy Spirit is something intangible. Ever hear of a breath that hears and
speaks physically? Only a human being can do those things.

“Further, we can see here that Jesus and the
Holy Spirit are both presentsimultaneously. But as Jesus himself
explains, the Paraclete can only come in his absence. This proves to us that
the Holy Spirit is not the Paraclete.”

The disciple sighed. “All this theology is making
me dizzy,” he explained. “Can you tell me a bit more about Mohammed? I don’t
know much about him except for his name, and that he founded a religion called
Islam.”

Weakly-Coupled Religions

“The problem with Moses’ teachings and those of
Jesus,” the master continued, “was: first, that they still were not universal
enough, and second, that they were weakly
coupled. “

The disciple frowned. “I don’t get it, sir,” he
said.

“Well, let’s tackle one at a time. Recall that
Moses’ precepts addressed a small portion of humanity; they were specific to
Jews alone. Jesus’ beautiful teachings, on the other hand, were only for adepts
of mysticism, and these too are always in a minority. Yet there had to be a
religion for all humankind: one that would embrace everyone, of whatever
temperament, inclination, or calling in life. This is why the two were not
universal enough.

“We now come to the second point. The Church
Fathers were well aware of this difficulty. They knew that Moses’ exoteric
teachings left out spirituality, while the esoteric teachings of Jesus omitted
the legal aspect which is a must in social life. They tried to remedy this
situation by combining the two —which
is why you have both the Old Testament and the New in the Bible.

“But in the end, it was a makeshift
arrangement. Certain interpretations grafted onto Jesus’ original doctrine
proved as incapable of mixing with Moses’ as water with oil. Moreover, even if
that had proved possible, the limitations of both which we’ve just discussed
precluded a truly universal synthesis.

“There are other contrasts as well. Judaism is
a worldly religion, whereas Christianity—as it developed later—reviled the body
and concentrated exclusively on the spirit. The Jewish God is a wrathful God,
whereas God is love in the Christian conception, and so on. Now each of these
conceptions excludes the other; man, for instance, is not just a disembodied
spirit (in which case he would be a ghost), nor simply a body (in which case he
would be merely a corpse), but a unique, living combination of the two.
Religion needs to recognize both sides of the coin, and it ought to address and
answer the needs of both aspects. Where would night be without day, or vice
versa? What was needed was a religion that radically combined the two, a synthesis—and
not merely a mixture—that transcended both. And that is why Mohammed had to
come.”

The disciple was silent for a while. “I can’t
be hearing all this,” he said at last.

“Oh, but you are,” the sage said gently. “You wanted
to hear the Truth, didn’t you? I told you it wouldn’t be easy. We don’t have to
go on if you don’t want to. It’s against our rules to force anyone.”

“Please continue,” said the disciple, after a
period of thoughtful digestion. “Do you mean that Mohammed concocted a new
religion out of Judaism and Christianity?”

“No,” the master explained patiently. “Religion
and philosophy are two different things. You and I could perhaps sit down and
construct a new philosophy, for instance, because philosophy depends on human
reason alone. But this is not the case with religion, for it depends on a
direct revelation from God, and comprises both rational and surrational
aspects. And a philosophy can generate new ideas, but it cannot generate a Man.”

“Surrational?” the student interjected.

“Well, since you ask, it’s time for some
definitions. Nonrational is, obviously, that which is not rational, and this
can be divided into two subsets: irrational and surrational. By irrational, I
mean something that is illogical, that contains a logical contradiction. For
example, 1=3 or 3=1 is a mathematical impossibility. Surrational or
superrational, on the other hand, is a higher degree of rationality. In other
words, we would find a surrational thing to be supremely rational, if only we were in possession of all the
facts. The surrational is as far above the rational as the irrational is
below it. For example, Moses’ adventures with Khidr related in the Koran are of
a surrational nature: Moses found that there were perfectly logical reasons for
Khidr’s actions which he was previously unable to make sense of, once the facts
were explained to him. The commandments and the ways of the Lord may be
mysterious, but they are not illogical once you know the inside story.

“Now I said that revelation contains both
rational and surrational elements. Every true religion was originally composed
of these two, but irrational elements also crept in with the passage of time.
Only Islam is immune to this process, which is why it has remained unpolluted.
And the surrational can only be imparted by God, for only He is omniscient. It
is mentioned in the Koran that it was ‘sent down by the Holy Spirit from the
Lord with Truth’ (16:102). Besides, the Koran explicitly states that if
Mohammed had added or modified anything on his own, God would have ripped out
his main artery (69:46). True religion is not something you can sit down and
invent, and if you try to do this, the result will be at best a
pseudo-religion, not a true one.”

Mohammed

“Why don’t we go back to Carlyle,” continued
the sage, “and see what he has to say. Could you kindly fetch the book from
that shelf again?” The disciple did so and, at the sage’s direction, began to
read:

...A greater number of God’s
creatures believe in Mahomet’s word at this hour than in any other word
whatever. Are we to suppose that it was a miserable piece of spiritual
legerdemain, this which so many creatures of the Almighty have lived by and
died by? I, for my part, cannot form any such supposition.

But of a Great Man, especially of him, I will
venture to assert that it is incredible that he should have been any other than
true... I should say sincerity, a
deep, great, genuine sincerity, is the first characteristic of all men in any
way heroic.

Such a man is what we call an original man; he comes to us at
first-hand... Really his utterances, are they not a kind of ‘revelation’;—what
we must call such for want of some other name? It is from the heart of the
world that he comes, he is a portion of the primal reality of things.

The man’s words were not false, nor his
workings here below... To kindle the
world; the world’s maker had ordered it so...

A silent, great soul; he was one of those who
cannot but be in earnest: whom Nature
herself has appointed to be sincere. While others walk in formulas and
hearsays, contented enough to dwell there, this man could not screen himself in
formulas; he was alone with his own soul and the reality of things.

A Hero, as I repeat, has this first
distinction, which, indeed, we may call first and last, the Alpha and Omega of
his whole Heroism. That he looks through the shows of things into things.

Communing with his own heart, in the silence
of the mountains; himself silent; open to the ‘small, still voices’; it was a
right natural custom!

...That we must submit to God. That our whole strength lies in resigned submission
to Him, whatsoever He do to us...

Much has been said of Mahomet’s propagating
his Religion by the sword... Yet withal, if we take this for an argument of the
truth or falsehood of a religion, there is a radical mistake in it. The sword
indeed: but where will you get your sword! Every new opinion, at its starting,
is precisely in a minority of one. In
one man’s head alone, there it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world
believes it: there is one man against all men. That he take a sword, and try to propagate with that, will do little for
him. You must first get your sword!

The student looked up. “Pardon
me, sir,” he said, but why Carlyle? I mean, why are we reading Carlyle’s words
rather than anyone else’s?”

“Because,” replied the sage,
“Carlyle is one of the first Europeans, perhaps the very first, to recognize
the Prophet’s true worth.” He made an indication with his hand to read on.

...[Nature] requires of a thing
only that it be genuine of heart: she
will protect it if so; will not if not so. There is a soul of truth in all the
things she ever gave harbor to.

The body of all Truth dies; and yet in all, I
say, there is a soul which never dies; which in new and ever-nobler embodiment
lives immortal as man himself! It is the way with Nature. The genuine essence
of Truth never dies.

If a book comes from the heart, it will
contrive to reach other hearts; all art and authorcraft is of small account to
that. One would say the primary character of the Koran is this of its genuineness, of its being a bona fide book...

To his [Mahomet’s] eyes it is forever clear
that this world wholly is miraculous. He sees what, as we said once before, all
great thinkers, ...in one way or other, have contrived to see: That this so
solid-looking material world is, at bottom, in very deed, Nothing; is a visual
and tactual Manifestation of God’s power and presence,—a shadow hung-out by Him
on the bosom o’ the void Infinite; nothing more.

Much has been said and written about the
sensuality of Mahomet’s Religion: more than was just. The indulgences, criminal
to us, which he permitted, were not of his appointment; he found them
practised, unquestioned from immemorial time in Arabia; what he did was to
curtail them, restrict them, not on one but on many sides.

...Enjoying things which are pleasant: that is
not the evil: it is the reducing of our mortal self to slavery by them that
is...

It is a calumny on men to say that they are roused
to heroic action by ease, hope of pleasure, recompense,—sugar-plums of any
kind, in this world or the next! In the meanest mortal there lies something
nobler... Difficulty, abnegation, martyrdom, death are the allurements that act on the heart of man. Kindle the inner genial
life of him, you have a flame that burns-up all lower considerations... Not by
flattering our appetites; no, by awakening the Heroic that slumbers in every
heart, can any Religion gain followers.

They called him Prophet, you say? Why, he
stood there face to face with them: bare, not enshrined in any mystery; visibly
clouting his own cloak, cobbling his own shoes; fighting, counselling, ordering
in the midst of them; they must have seen what kind of man he was, let him be called what you like! No emperor with his tiaras was obeyed as this
man in a cloak of his own clouting.

...I said, the Great Man was always as
lightning out of Heaven: the rest of men waited for him like fuel, and they too
would flame.

The student looked up inquiringly and, at the
sage’s nod, restored the book to its place. “Tell me more about Mohammed,” he
said.

The sage smiled.

“You’re asking me to do the impossible,” he
said. “No description of Mohammed is enough to reveal him to you, and in the
end that is what you really need.

“A search in libraries and bookstores,” he
continued, “will yield many histories of Islam and biographies of Mohammed. You
will learn much concerning the historical facts surrounding his life. From
these you will come away with a vague sense of dissatisfaction, for none of
them are sufficient to explain the Prophet, his religion, or the phenomenal
success of the two. In order really
to understand, you should have been there; you should have seen the light shining in his eyes, his jet-black wavy hair, his
arresting appearance, his ineffable, electrifying presence that would have told you immediately that here was a
person who could not lie, even in jest. He was the handsomest human being who
ever lived, but more important was his beauty of character and supreme moral
conduct. One glance would be sufficient to anyone whose heart isn’t blind that
if ever there was a Prophet of God, this was it. His enemies themselves, in
fact, never doubted these truths; it was only their innate stubbornness and
their vested interests which they felt he challenged that prevented them from
openly acknowledging the obvious. And now, today, the facts of his life have
become a kind of Rorschach Test for all his biographers—lacking, naturally
enough, such a vision, each one tries to account for his unique success with an
explanation that he or she likes best. They read their pet theory, their own
favorite brainchild, into his life.

His Battles

“Take his battles, for instance. Biographers
make much of his campaigns because the most facts are recorded about them and
because wars are the stuff which history is made of. Yet these are of secondary
importance, because they were necessary for the survival of the newborn
religion and for the eradication of evil, but not essential for the original
Revelation itself. Just think: the Archangel Gabriel had already come to
Mohammed, God had already revealed His religion, and the Prophet and his small
flock of followers had endured more than a decade of religious persecution. The
Prophet had already experienced his Ascension, the highest spiritual elevation
known to man. During all this time the Prophet tried to spread his religion
peacefully. It was only when it became obvious that his enemies would not
suffer him or Islam to survive that the Prophet emigrated to Medina, drew his
sword, and did not sheath it again until Mecca was conquered. It was both
self-defense, and an attempt to make the world safe for Islam; an attempt which
succeeded against impossible odds, and which was won with a minimum of
casualties on both sides. The total of dead did not exceed 500 in all his battles put
together, and in one was as low as ten.

“One historian has noted that the life of the
Prophet is a tale of two cities, and such is indeed the case. The period of
Revelation belonged to Mecca, the period of consolidation to Medina. If the
Prophet had not combated evil from his base in Medina, Islam could not have
survived. But the essence of Revelation had already been communicated to him in
Mecca. The period in Medina added fresh details, without altering this essence
in any way. If the idolaters had not been so implacably opposed to Mohammed, so
bent on destroying him and his religion, the battles might not have taken place
at all. He was not the warlord that some people make him out to be. He was a
businessman, you know, and he had the highest praise for knowledge and
science—more than any other prophet or religion.”

His Miracles

“What about miracles?” the student asked. “All
prophets have shown miracles. Did he do so too?”

“Well, we should first get one thing straight
about miracles,” the sage said. “Miracles are primarily the ‘calling cards’ of
God, which tell a certain people: ‘Here is a person to whom I have entrusted my
instructions. Heed him, and you won’t lose.’ Miracles are performed by God for the people, not by a prophet himself.

“But in the end, we can’t place much store by
miracles, for they are specific to prophets alone. They can’t be deemed a basis
for widespread emulation, and are not what religion is all about. Religion is
moral behavior towards every being in the universe, closeness to God, and
attainment of this closeness through worship—or techniques—which God specifies.
Hence, not only is it impossible for ordinary people like you and me to perform
miracles or extraordinary psychic feats, but these are actually a hindrance to
religion and spiritual progress, for they keep the mind focussed on the wrong
things.

“Now many miracles are recounted about the
Prophet, which I leave you to discover in his biographies. He himself used to
say that his only miracle worthy of note was the Koran—meaning its beauty,
profoundness and inviolability.

“The Prophet called the Koran his ‘standing
miracle’—that he, unschooled to the point of barely being able to write his
name, should have authored the Koran, the masterpiece of all time of Arabic,
the most evocative language in the world, is so unthinkable that its miraculous
nature would be clear to all but the most obstinate. In the Prophet’s case,
unlettered meant unfettered—an unfettered mind, a heart unhindered by the pride
that comes from too much book-learning. He was thus a conduit ready to convey
undistorted the pure, pristine Truth of God.”

The
sage then proceeded to instruct the student about what Mohammed said, what he
did, and what he was—who he was,
based on eyewitness accounts.

His Asceticism

“The mountain and the desert,” the sage
continued, “are key symbols in the careers of the greatest prophets. Just as
Moses had his forty days on Mount Sinai with his Lord, and Jesus spent forty
days in the desert overcoming the temptations of Satan, Mohammed’s prophethood
was preceded by long sojourns on the Mountain of Light (Mt. Hira) in a cave
facing a rocky deserted expanse, where Gabriel first announced his mission to
him. He heard the rocks and trees call to him: ‘Messenger of God,’ which might
have been put down to a mental state, were it not for the fact that Ali, his
cousin, heard them too on occasions when he accompanied him. The Prophet was at
first deeply frightened by the unexpected turn his ascetic practices had taken,
but was reassured by a relative of his first wife, a Christian deeply versed in
the Old and New Testaments, who said: ‘The Archangel has come upon him, the
greatest nomos (the Law or Torah) has come to him.’“

His Morality

“What about his morality?” the student asked.

“The Prophet of God was the most generous, the
most truthful and gentlest of men. He was always immersed in thought. His
silence was longer than his speech, and he never spoke in vain. He would
mention God’s name at the beginning and end of his words. In talking he chose
short words loaded with meaning. His words were true and to the point. He never
used more words, or less, than was necessary.

“He never broke anyone’s feelings, nor did he
belittle anyone. He did not get angry for worldly things. But when someone’s
rights were violated, nothing could stop his anger before the wrong was
righted. He never got angry about or avenged a wrong directed at his person or
business. When he got angry, he would immediately give up on his anger and
would conceal it. He would not laugh out loud; the most he did was smile.

“He always displayed a cheerful countenance and
good disposition to those in his presence. He was very kind and forgiving.
Hardness of heart, bitterness of tongue, and repulsiveness of nature did not
exist in him.

“He did not argue with or shout at anyone. He
did not use bad language or scold anybody. He was not a miser. What he
disliked, he pretended not to see. He did not disillusion the expectant, and
remained silent about what he did not like. He did not quarrel with anyone,
speak too much, or busy himself with vain things.

“He left the public alone on three points: he
did not criticize or blame anybody, either to his face or behind his back; he
did not pry after the shames or shortcomings of anyone; and he never told
anyone anything that was not good or edifying for them.

“He listened to the last person with the same
attention he accorded to the first speaker. If those present found something
amusing, he would comply with their mirth, and if they were amazed at
something, he too would join in and express wonder. He tolerated the bluntness
and depressiveness of words and questions directed by strangers, so that his Companions
might follow his example. He used to say: ‘When you see a needy person
requesting his need, help him to meet that need.’

“He did not accept praise that was not
truthful. As long as a right was not violated, he would not interrupt a
conversation. When it was, he would either forbid it or depart from that
company.

“He brought brotherhood, compassion, virtue and
lovingkindness, and taught men the meaning and purpose of being human. He would
talk gently with his Companions and joke with them. He would love and fondle
children and take them in his arms. All human beings, whether slaves or free
men, rich or poor, were the same to him. He pleased everybody. He would visit
the sick living on the outskirts of the city. He would greet people without
waiting for them to greet him first. He said: ‘Exchange greetings, so that you
may come to love one another.’ He always smiled at and spoke gently with
people. A pleasant smile always hovered on his lips. If someone came to him
while he was at Prayer, he would cut it short so as not to keep them waiting
and inquire about their situation.

“He was very harmonious in his family life. He
would not hurt anyone in his household, and would shower them with tenderness.

“Love and gentleness permeated his whole being.
He took pity on those in need. Because he always tried to answer their needs,
not much could be found in his household at any time. He would give to whoever
asked something. If he didn’t have anything, he would borrow from others and
still try to fulfill a need.

“He was very humble. He ate with his servants
and conversed with them. He would serve guests himself. He always spoke well of
others.

“He was very tenderhearted towards the poor. He
always considered it a duty to mend their broken hearts. He loved children. His
grandchildren would clamber all over him during Prayer, and he would not say
anything. Nor was his love confined to human beings; it extended to animals and
indeed, to all beings. He also counseled love for flowers, plants and trees. He
promised recompense for anyone who watered a parched tree. As a poet observed:
‘He went to a school where God was the teacher. Accept the summary of words: he
was human, but higher than the angels.’“

His Trustworthiness

“The Prophet was so absolutely dependable in
both word and deed,” the sage went on, “that he earned the title ‘the
Trustworthy’ among his people long before he received his commission of
prophethood. In fact, in his first public appearance as prophet, he stood on a
hill and addressed his listeners: ‘If I were to tell you that an army is behind
this hill, ready to attack you, would you believe me?’ ‘Yes, we would, for we
have never seen you lie,’ they all replied, and among them were the Father of
Ignorance and the Father of Flame, who later became archenemies of the
Prophet.”

“Yet they still didn’t believe his message?”

“Unfortunately, no. Such is the way with all
prophets: Pharaoh and his henchmen didn’t believe in Moses, few of his
contemporaries believed in Jesus, and, naturally, not everyone believed in
Mohammed.

“Later on, the Prophet was sending letters to
the political leaders of his time, inviting them to join the new religion. He
sent one such letter to the Eastern Roman emperor Heraclius, who summoned one
of the greatest enemies of the Prophet to discuss the matter. This man
confirmed that the Prophet had never been known to lie. Heraclius then made a
very wise observation: ‘It is unthinkable,’ he remarked, ‘that a man should
refrain from lying for so long and yet lie against God.’ In addition, it is
nothing short of amazing that the Prophet was so truthful that even his
greatest enemies could not lie against him.”

“That certainly is interesting,” remarked the student.

“A saying of the Prophet enjoins truthfulness
on his followers:

‘Promise me regarding six points, and I promise
you Paradise:

1. When you
speak, speak the truth.

2. When you
make a promise, fulfill it.

3. When
something is entrusted to you, be trustworthy.

4. Guard your
private parts.

5. Shut your
eyes to what is Forbidden.

6. Keep your
hands away from what is Forbidden.’

“Once, the Prophet saw a woman call her child:
‘See what I’m going to give you,’ said she. ‘What are you going to give him?’
he asked. ‘A few dates,’ she replied. ‘If you weren’t going to give him
anything, you would have been telling a lie,’ he remarked. One had to be
truthful, even to a child or an animal.”

The disciple said nothing, but his demeanor
showed that he was impressed.

His Tolerance

“Was he a tolerant person?” he asked.

“Well, look at it this way,” said the sage.
“Noah placed a curse on his people that resulted in the Flood. Moses did not
save Pharaoh when the Red Sea closed upon him, even though Pharaoh repented,
accepted faith in God, and called for help in his last moments. Even the gentle
Jesus sometimes railed against ‘fools, hypocrites, serpents, generations of
vipers.’

“Contrast this now with the conduct of the
Prophet, who went to Taif to seek help, and was insulted and driven away with sticks
and stones by an angry mob. His adopted son tried to shield him, but he was
nevertheless bloodied all over by stones that struck home. At that moment the
Archangel Gabriel appeared to him, and said: ‘If you so desire, I will lay
waste to this town.’ ‘No,’ came the Prophet’s reply, ‘that’s not what I’ve been
sent for.’ And he took refuge in God’s mercy with a prayer.

“A woman on the side of the enemy once tried to
poison him, but he forgave her. The only thing he found intolerable was high
treason in wartime.

“And at the Battle of Uhud, when the Prophet’s
followers suffered a temporary defeat, the Prophet’s life was in danger, and he
was hit with a rock that pierced his cheek and knocked out a tooth. Even then,
he prayed to his Lord: ‘Forgive my people, for they do not know.’

“Why, that’s just like Jesus!” the student
exclaimed.

“Of course,” said the sage, “but there’s more
to come.

“The woman Hind and her prosperous husband were
sworn enemies of the Prophet. When Hamza, one of the Prophet’s uncles, slew her
uncle and delivered the death-blow to her father in the first great battle
between the Prophet and his opponents, the fiery Hind swore revenge, promising
to eat Hamza’s liver raw.

“Accordingly she enlisted the help of Savage,
an Abyssinian slave and expert lancer, promising him his freedom and other
rewards. At the next battle, Savage stalked Hamza and, seeing his opportunity,
hurled his lance. Hamza fell, dead. When the battle was over, Savage went over
to Hamza’s body and, on Hind’s instructions, ripped open his belly, cut out his
liver and brought it to Hind. She took it, bit away a piece, chewed it,
swallowed a morsel in fulfillment of her vow and spat out the rest. He then led
her to the body, where she cut off his nose, ears and other parts of his flesh,
telling the women around her to mutilate other bodies.”

The disciple’s revulsion was evident in his
face.

“When the Prophet saw the remains of his uncle,
he was angry as he had never been before. And if he had wished to avenge
himself for any wrong, this barbarous act would have been it. Yet when he
entered Mecca in triumph, he asked his enemies, among whom were Hind and
Savage: ‘What do you expect of me?’ They replied that they expected mercy of
him. He then spoke to them in words of forgiveness, as Joseph had done to his
brothers long ago in Egypt: ‘Verily I say as my brother Joseph said: “This day
you will not be upbraided or reproached. God forgives you, and He is the Most
Merciful of the merciful” (12:92). You may go, you are all free.’ When he saw
Savage later on, he asked him to recount the details, and when he was finished,
said: ‘Alas, take your face from me, don’t let me look upon you again.’ And
with these words he set him free. It was never his way to reward evil with
evil.”

“How did he treat people who made gross
mistakes?” the student asked.

“Well,” said the sage, “consider the following
episode: The first mosque in Medina had no roof. One day there was a great
commotion in the mosque. Everybody was in an uproar. When the Prophet emerged
from his home to investigate, he discovered that an ignorant and boorish
follower had urinated in the mosque. Everyone was furious, and the man was
trying to defend himself on the grounds that the hot sun would soon dry away
the puddle.

“At this juncture we should remember that
excrement of any kind is considered foul in Islam, and that even the tiniest
drop of urine must be washed away from one’s clothes. A saying attributed to
the Prophet states: ‘Cleanliness derives from faith.’ Urinating in a place
reserved for God and worship is thus tantamount to sacrilege.

“Far from berating the man, however, the
Prophet explained to the Companions that he didn’t know any better. ‘He doesn’t
know,’ he said, ‘and this indicates his need to learn. Teach him, tell him,
don’t shout at him. Make things easy, not difficult.’ Then, according to one
account, the Prophet had some water brought in. He prevented others who wanted
to clean up the mess. ‘This is my task,’ he said. And with his own hands, he
washed the mosque clean without a bad word or complaint.”

“With his own hands,” murmured the disciple.

“On another occasion this same man said to the
Prophet: ‘May God place just you and me in His Paradise, and exclude everyone
else.’ ‘What a pity,’ the Prophet observed, ‘that you’ve confined such
limitless mercy to such a small circle.’“

“How did he tolerate his enemies?”

“One of the archenemies of the Prophet was a
powerful and wealthy man nicknamed ‘the Father of Ignorance’, whom everyone
feared because of his ruthlessness. He thought the Prophet was a dangerous
sorcerer. Once, he chanced upon the Prophet when he was alone at the Holy
Sanctuary in Mecca, and could not resist the chance to make clear that he, at
least, was not overawed. So he proceeded to insult him with all the abuse he
could muster, but the Prophet never said a word, and just looked at him. When
he had heaped on him all the insults he could think of, he went his way, and
the Prophet sadly rose to his feet and went home.”

His Compassion

“Now the story is told,” continued the master,
“that the Father of Ignorance, in his extreme hatred, once dug a wide manhole
in a street where the Prophet often passed, filled it with filth, covered it
with branches and proceeded to wait. His idea was that the Prophet would fall
into the hole, emerge covered with piss and dung, and thus be humiliated. When
he heard shouts that the Prophet was coming, he rushed to witness the
spectacle; in his excitement tripped, however, and fell into the very hole he
had intended for the Prophet. When the Prophet came upon him, and saw him
standing in the filth in a dazed sort of way, he understood immediately what
had happened. Without a word he reached out his hand, pulled him out of the
slime, cleaned him with his own hands as best he could, and gave him his cloak
to cover himself until he got home, saying merely: ‘Don’t do it again.’
‘Falling into a hole (trap) of his own making,’ an expression famous in the
Middle East, derives from this event.

“The Prophet and his Companions had returned to
Medina after a battle with many casualties. The next day, after the morning
Prayer and the funeral Prayer for their dead, the Prophet asked: ‘Suppose after
a battle you are walking through the battlefield, and see a wounded Companion
and a wounded enemy soldier not far away. Both are in need of water, and you
have some water with you. Whom would you give it to?’

“The Companions all said they would give it to
their friend. Omar, however, intervened: ‘God and His Messenger know best,’ he
said. ‘What do you suggest?’

“‘I would give half the water to our man and
the other half to the enemy soldier,’ the Prophet replied, ‘no matter how much
or how little water is available.’ The Companions were all surprised at this
answer. ‘How can this be?’ they asked.

“The Prophet explained: ‘The situation is
different under those circumstances. The other person is no longer an enemy
soldier, but a wounded, thirsty man, a human being in need. It doesn’t matter
if he gets up and resumes fighting against us afterwards, it is incumbent on us
to share the water between the two.’

“This illustrates the attribute of Compassion,
which rules for all beings simply by virtue of the fact that they exist,
regardless of anything else. The Prophet used to tell the story of a whore who
gained Paradise because she saw a dog dying of thirst one day, fashioned a rope
out of her dress, tied her shoe to it, lowered the shoe into a well, and saved
the dog with the water she drew out. He also told a complementary story of a
woman who went to Hell because she was cruel to her cat and starved it to
death.”

The disciple shook his head in amazement.
“You’re telling me things I’ve never heard before,” he said. “How come I
haven’t heard any of this?”

“Perhaps,” the sage replied gently, “because
you haven’t met anyone who could tell you about them.”

His Mercy

“God addresses his Messenger in the Koran: ‘I
did not send you except as a mercy to the worlds,’ and indeed the Prophet was
the most merciful of men. He himself once remarked: ‘I have been sent as a
mercy, not as a bringer of curses.’

“During one of their encampments, a Companion
brought in a fledgling he had caught. One of the parent birds came and threw
itself into his hands. Men’s faces were full of wonder, and the Prophet said:
‘Do you wonder at this bird? You have taken its young, and it has thrown itself
down in merciful tenderness to its young. Yet I swear by God, your Lord is more
merciful to you than this bird is to its fledgling.’ And he told the man to put
back the young bird where he had found it.

“On another occasion, a snake emerged from the
rocks when he was at Mina. The Companions all fell upon it, but the snake
managed to escape. The Prophet, who was watching from a distance, remarked:
‘You’re now free of its harm, and it is free of yours.’

“A poet had strenuously rejected the new
religion and had written vilifying verses against the Prophet. In return, a
warrant was out for his head. But his brother persuaded him to go to the
Prophet and ask forgiveness, for he would not kill anyone who came to him in
repentance. The poet therefore went to the Prophet and, without revealing who
he was, asked him whether he would receive the poet if he were to bring the
repenting poet to the Prophet. When the Prophet said he would, he revealed who
he was, and the Prophet stopped angry Companions from harming him, saying: ‘He
has come in repentance, and is no longer what he used to be.’

“When the Prophet’s little son was dying, he
was by his side. As the child breathed his last, the Prophet took him in his
arms, and tears flowed from his eyes. Since he had forbidden wailing, people
thought that all expression of grief was to be denied, and hence a Companion
addressed him: ‘This is what you have forbidden. When Moslems see you weeping,
they too will weep.’ The Prophet continued to weep, and when he could find his
voice he said: ‘This I don’t forbid. These are the promptings of tenderness and
mercy, and he who shows no mercy will receive no mercy... The eye weeps, the heart
grieves, nor do we say anything that would offend the Lord.’

“A man, seeing the Prophet frolic with his
little grandsons on his lap, remarked: ‘I have ten children, yet I haven’t ever
kissed one of them.’ The Prophet, who was an orphan twice over and had lost his
closest kin while only a child, retorted: ‘What can I do if God has removed
mercy from your heart?’“

His Intelligence

“All prophets are gifted with innate genius,”
continued the sage, “and the Prophet was the most accomplished of them all. When
he was young, the tribes of Mecca were repairing the Holy Kaaba (“Cube”),[14]
but could not agree among themselves as to which tribe should have the honor of
lifting the Black Stone—the cornerstone—into place.
Things were getting out of hand, and they finally decided to appoint the first
person entering the Holy Sanctuary as arbiter between them. This happened to be
Mohammed. When the situation was explained to him, he told them to place the
Black Stone in the center of a large piece of cloth. A representative of each
tribe would hold the cloth on one side, and they would lift it collectively.
When this was done, the future Prophet took the Black Stone and placed it in
its niché himself.”

“Isn’t that clever,” the student thought.
Aloud, he said: “was the Prophet a man of reason?”

“Certainly,” said the sage. “Common sense
played a great part in the Prophet’s deeds and advice. Once, a Companion came
in from outdoors, and the Prophet asked him what he had done with his camel. ‘I
entrusted it to God,’ the man said, implying that he had left the camel free to
wander. The Prophet disapproved. ‘First tether your camel to a secure post,
then trust in God,’ he said. Obviously, this is meant not just for camels, but
indicates the need to take precautions so that the desired results may be
obtained in any enterprise.”

“What a vast generalization from the simplest
of examples,” the student marveled. “Such an economy of words to describe a
vast domain of experience.”

His Love of Work

“The Prophet was extremely industrious,”
resumed the sage, “and when on a task he worked harder than anyone else. Such
was the case, for example, when a ditch was being dug for the defense of
Medina. During expeditions the Prophet would gather firewood just like anyone
else, in spite of the fact that his Companions tried to prevent him from menial
labor.

“Once, the Prophet and an entourage of
Companions were going somewhere. On their way they came upon a man who was
sitting on the ground, doing nothing. The Prophet passed by him without a
greeting. On their way back, they passed by the same man, who by this time had
picked up a stick and was idly drawing figures on the ground. This time the
Prophet greeted him. The people who were with him inquired why he had not
greeted the man the first time around but had done so on the second. ‘The first
time he wasn’t doing anything,’ the Prophet replied. ‘The second time around,
at least he was doing something.’“

His Attitude to the Poor

“The Prophet always befriended the poor, and
tried to help them out as best he could. A part of one of the long collonades
in the Medina mosque was reserved for the homeless and destitute, and because
of a bench reserved for them they were called ‘the People of the Bench’. The
Prophet spent time with the poor whenever he could, listening to their troubles
and devising solutions. Whenever there was a food shortage, as there often was,
he used to say: ‘The food of one is enough for two, the food of two is enough
for four, and the food of four is enough for eight.’“

His Resolve

“At an early stage of his career, the vested
interests of Mecca tried to discourage the Prophet and buy him off. They
summoned his beloved uncle, under whose protection he was, and told him: ‘If it
is riches your nephew is after, we will make him the richest man in Mecca. If
it is power he wants, we will give him leadership. If it is women, he can take
his pick. Anything, so long as he desists from this newfangled religion of his.
Otherwise, we cannot guarantee his safety.’

“When his uncle told him that the rulers of
Mecca had sent him a message, the Prophet was at first overjoyed, thinking that
this signified their acceptance of God’s religion. Imagine the letdown he
suffered when he learned the truth. The worst came, however, when his uncle
said: ‘I cannot safeguard you unless you accept their terms.’

“The Prophet took a few moments to adjust to
the blow. Then he said: ‘Uncle, hear me well, and relate to them exactly what I
say. If they were to put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, I
still would not turn back from my path.’ Having said this, he stepped out into
the clean night air, and broke down. ‘If you do not protect your religion, my
Lord, what can I do?’ he implored.

“And at that moment, God’s mercy reached out
and touched his uncle’s heart. ‘I cannot leave my nephew to the mercy of these
cynics,’ he thought. He stepped out and assured the Prophet that he would stand
by him through thick or thin. And the two were reunited in tears.”

His Patience

“Once his protecting uncle was dead,” the sage
continued after a pause, “control passed over to another uncle who was inimical
and who is referred to by his nickname ‘the Father of Flame’. The protection he
gave his nephew was a sham, and the Prophet was subjected to ridicule and
humiliation as never before, which he met with uncommon forbearance. On one
occasion a passer-by leaned over his gate and tossed a piece of putrefying
offal in his cooking-pot. On another, a man threw a sheep’s uterus, filthy with
blood and excrement, over his neck when he was praying in the courtyard of his
house. In response, the Prophet merely picked up the object on the end of a
stick and, standing at his gate, loudly inquired what kind of protection this
was.

“At another time, when the Prophet was coming
from the Kaaba, a man took a handful of filth and threw it in his face and over
his head. When he came home, one of his daughters washed him clean, crying as
she did so. ‘Don’t cry, dear,’ he said; ‘God will protect your father.’“

“What they did was terrible,” said the disciple.

“It certainly was,” the master replied. “The
Prophet didn’t fight those battles for nothing. Besides, I’m not even telling
you about how his followers were persecuted.”

His Temperance

“A wife’s uncle once came to the Prophet, and
asked permission to make himself a eunuch and spend the rest of his life as a
wandering beggar. Alhough he was married, he had been an ascetic before the
revelation of Islam.

“‘Don’t you have a fair example in me?’ asked
the Prophet. ‘I associate with women, I eat meat, I fast and I break my fast.
Whoever makes himself or other men eunuchs does not belong to my people.’
However, the Prophet had reason to believe that he was not fully understood, so
on another occasion he asked him the same question, adding: ‘You fast every
day, and keep vigil every night in prayer. Don’t do so. For your eyes have
rights over you, and your body has its rights, and your family have their
rights. So pray, and sleep, and fast, and break your fast.’

“At another time, three Companions were vying with
each other. One claimed that he fasted all the time, the second that he spent
the nights without sleep, and the third said that he did not approach women.
When the Prophet heard this, he said: ‘This is not my way. I fast on some days
and eat on others, I stay awake sometimes but I sleep, too, and I am married.’
And he added the rejoinder: ‘Beware of excess in your religion.’ Moderation was
always his motto.”

His Generosity

“One of the Companions had a camel which was
old and weak, and he could not afford a better one. The Prophet asked him:
‘Will you sell me this camel of yours?’ He answered: ‘I will give it to you.’
‘No,’ the Prophet said, ‘sell it to me.’ He understood from the Prophet’s tone
that he was expected to bargain, so they bargained until the price was raised
to an ounce of gold. When he brought the camel to the Prophet, he was given a
bit more than an ounce, and as he turned to go, the Prophet called him back.
‘Take your camel,’ he said. ‘It is yours, and keep the price you were paid for
it.’

“A Bedouin came and asked the Prophet to give
him something. The Prophet did so. A second request was again met. Since the
Prophet had nothing left to give, on the third request he promised he would
give the first chance he got. Omar was disturbed by this, and commented: ‘You
shouldn’t trouble yourself so much.’ These words, however, displeased the
Messenger of God. Sensing this, a Companion rose and said: ‘Give, don’t think
that God will make you poor and remove His bounty from you.’ ‘This,’ replied the
Prophet, ‘is what I’ve been ordered to do.’ An unbeliever, overwhelmed by the
generosity of the Prophet, once similarly remarked: ‘My people, rush to enter
Islam. Mohammed gives in such a manner that only a person who doesn’t fear
poverty and trusts in God completely can give in this way.’“

His Humility

“The Prophet used to rest on a bare straw mat.
Once, a woman brought him a present, a kind of cushion that was a bit—if not
much—more comfortable. When he saw it, the Prophet instructed his wife to give
it back. ‘If I had wished,’ he said, ‘God would have caused mountains of gold
and silver to walk by my side; but I don’t want it.’ And he once addressed a
man trembling in awe of him: ‘My brother, do not fear me. Like you, I am a
human being, whose mother broke dry bread.’

“Sometimes the Prophet would pray until
morning, or stand in Prayer until his feet were all blisters. Once, he was
asked: ‘God has forgiven you everything. Why do you exert yourself so much?’ He
answered: ‘Then shouldn’t I be a thanksgiving servant?’

“On another occasion, he was warning his
followers never to be sure of their fate and always to strive diligently. ‘How
about you?’ they asked. ‘For me it’s the same,’ he replied. They were taken
aback. ‘How can that be?’ they asked. ‘Yes,’ he said, ‘I am the Messenger of
God, and God has vouchsafed everything to me, yet even I can’t be sure what my
end will be.’“

“So humble, too,” the student thought to
himself.

“It was not his desire to become a ruler. When
circumstances forced him to act as one, he was the epitome of Plato’s
‘philosopher king’, or Nietzsche’s ‘Caesar—with the heart of Christ’.

“Humility and simplicity were the essence of
his morality. He used to tell his Companions: ‘Don’t praise me excessively like
Christians have done with Jesus. I am a servant of God. Just call me God’s
servant and Messenger.’

“Once, leaning on his staff, he came upon his
Companions. They all stood up immediately. He didn’t like this, however, and
said: ‘Don’t stand up for me like strangers do who wish to show respect for
each other.’“

His Companions

“One great advantage Mohammed had over Jesus,”
the sage went on to explain, “was the impeccable nature of his Companions.
Jesus’ disciples betrayed him or deserted him at the critical moment.
Mohammed’s Companions, on the other hand, formed a ‘wall of flesh’, as it were,
whenever their Beloved Prophet was threatened. This cannot be attributed to
coincidence, and is indicative of Divine protection—it points to the intention
of Providence to make sure that the Prophet and his message would survive. One
of his enemies once remarked: ‘No father loves his son as much as his
Companions love Mohammed.’ And one of their ambassadors remarked when he
returned to Mecca: ‘I have been sent as envoy to kings—to Caesar and Chosroes
and the Negus—and I have not seen a king whose men honor him as much as the
Companions of Mohammed honor Mohammed. If he commands anything, they almost
outstrip his word in fulfilling it; when he performs his ablution, they almost
fight to take away its water; when he speaks, their voices are hushed in his
presence; nor will they look him fully in the face, but lower their eyes in
reverence for him.’

“It was his Companions, too, who bore the
burden of faithfully recording the Koran and the Prophet’s Way and successfully
transmitting them to later generations, not only in word but in deed. It is for
this reason that he remarked: ‘My Companions are like the fixed stars in the
night sky. Follow any one of them, and you will be rightly guided.’“

Epilogue

The seeker looked despondent. “What you’ve been
telling me, sir,” he protested, “is just too good to be true. How can anyone
ever hope to emulate such an example successfully?”

The sage laughed. “Cheer up, son,” he said.
“The burden is light. The Prophet’s religion is the easiest to perform. There’s
nothing in it that an average adolescent can’t learn or practice. And while the
Prophet’s example may be unattainable, we’re not all called upon to be him.

“But if you would
aspire to approach him, to be like him, then you’re talking about
sainthood. And this has been eased so much nowadays that only a little sincere
effort is enough to accomplish a lot.

“Ibrahim Adham was a sultan, but he had to
forsake all he possessed in order to become a saint. In a later age, Gilani,
the great sage, remarked: ‘Had he lived today, we would have made him a saint
in any case. He wouldn’t have had to renounce his kingdom.’

“The main point in sainthood is self-control.
That’s how the Prophet achieved what he did. His Companions would ask: ‘Don’t
you have a self, an ego?’ And he would answer: ‘Of course I do. As a matter of
fact, mine is greater and worse than any of yours. But I’ve made it surrender
to God’—succeeded, that is, in making it a Moslem.”

The student fidgeted in his seat. “I beg your
pardon ever so much, sir,” he said, but can’t we possibly do without the God
concept? Because I think that’s what this is all leading up to.”

“I’m afraid we can’t,” was the master’s reply.
“The existence of God is the central fact about the universe. That’s why almost
all religions have emphasized it so much. Ultimate, or Absolute, Reality had a
reason for spawning relative, conditioned reality. God created the universe and
man for a purpose, and unless we act in accordance with that purpose, we can
never achieve lasting happiness. We will then be tossed to and fro like
driftwood on the high seas.

“Furthermore, God is Compassionate and
All-forgiving, but there is one thing He won’t forgive: associating partners
with Him. If He won’t stand for transgressions against His Unity, think how
much worse it must be to reduce that Unity to zero in one’s mind.

“Let me just quote you a passage from The Upanishads: ‘If you think you know
the truth about Brahman, know that you know little.’“

“Brahman?”

“‘Truth is One, yet the sages call it by many
names.’“

“There’s another thing,” the student said. “I
still can’t swallow this bit about the afterlife and Heaven and Hell.”

“My boy,” said the sage, “it doesn’t matter
whether you accept a fact or not. A fact is a fact, and will make itself known
as such in its own due time. We can only inquire why God created Heaven and Hell. In Sufism we have a saying: ‘The
disciple should always be between hope and fear.’ He will be attracted by hope
and repelled by fear, and this will aid his spiritual ascent. Just as we can’t
have electric current without positive and negative poles, and as we can’t have
magnetism without the N and S poles, so we can’t obtain spiritual evolution
without the twin poles of hope and fear. There’s an adage in English that
summarizes things beautifully: ‘We promise according to our hopes, but perform
according to our fears.’ In other words: no fear, no performance. On the other
hand, fear without hope leads to paralysis and despair, so hope is needed, too.

It’s all right to dwell on the Blissful Aspect
(Beauty) of God, on Love and Compassion and Mercy, but you’ll watch your step
only if you bear in mind that He has a Wrathful Aspect (Majesty), too. The
combination of the Blissful and the Wrathful makes for maturity or Perfection.
Fear of God leads us to obey His laws, and obeying His laws inspires love for
God in our hearts. In other words, if God’s commandments are obeyed, they lead
to the love of God. The proper destiny of man takes him from earth and leads
him to Heaven, but if one isn’t careful one can easily find that one has landed
in ‘the other place’. So care and caution are necessary.

“An uneducated man came to the Prophet of God
one day, and the Prophet assigned him a teacher who would teach him the Koran.
They studied for a long time, until they came to the verses: ‘He who does a
particle of good shall see its recompense, and he who does a particle of evil
shall see its recompense’ (99:7-8). ‘That’s it!’ the man exclaimed. “That’s all
the information I need.’ His teacher was rather taken aback; they had much more
studying to do. So they decided to take the matter to the Prophet. The man
said: ‘I am an illiterate man, and I don’t have much time for studies. Is it
okay if I act by these verses and skip the rest?’ The Prophet confirmed this,
and the man went his way.

“That, in a nutshell, is the reason for Heaven
and Hell. And the man was a wise one indeed, for it is the quintessential
wisdom of all the prophets and sages: ‘Whatever you do, you do to yourself.’
‘As you sow, so shall you reap,’ and that is why you must ‘do as you would be
done by.’ ‘That is all you know on earth, and all you need to know,’ as Keats
might have put it. But beyond this first and foremost principle, there are also
many other details to be known, and we could never have discovered or fathomed
them if God hadn’t revealed them to us through the prophets.”

The student scratched his head. “I don’t get
it, sir,” he said. “What’s your angle? I mean, there are so many different
versions of Islam today. Which one do you profess to?”

“My son,” said the sage, “before all the
interpretations of Islam; long before the twelve major dervish orders, the
countless sects, the four schools of law; before Sunnism or Shi’ism or Sufism
or anything else; before, indeed, the Prophet’s death or even his Emigration to
Medina, there was the pure, crystal-clear teaching of Mohammed. It is that
which is important above all else, although you shouldn’t deny yourself the
developments of later generations. For they are the fruit of the seed that the
Prophet planted; they make explicit what was latent in his teachings. It is
Mohammedanism, leading a Mohammedan life, that is all-important. Of course, in
saying this I don’t intend or imply a deification of Mohammed. What I have in
mind is the emulation of Mohammed’s example in one’s daily life. Mark my words:
Mohammed is not only the Prophet of Moslems, but of all humanity; and the Koran
is not just the book of Islam, but of all mankind.

“What you and I are doing is,” he continued,
“we’re taking a time tunnel back to the age of the Prophet. Or maybe”—and here
he smiled enigmatically—”the Prophet is taking a time tunnel to our age.”

The student sighed. “What a pity,” he said,
“that we can’t witness Mohammed today. Those who lived in his time were the
really lucky ones.”

“My son,” the sage replied, “allow me to let
you in on a little secret. Mohammed’s corporeal life has indeed passed away,
and there’s nothing we can do about that. But his spirit survives on another
plane of existence, where it is still accessible to those who ardently desire
to meet him. May God grant that you and I be lucky enough to be graced with a
vision of him on that plane.”

And with that remark, he ended his words.

WHAT DOES “ISLAM” MEAN?

In order to avoid misunderstandings, it is
perhaps worthwhile to look at the meaning of the word “Islam”.

“Islam”
means “surrendering to and obeying” God. But the full meaning of the word can
only be brought out by looking at the other words deriving from the same root,
SLM. For in Arabic, words from the same root possess meanings that complement
and complete one another. For this reason, they constitute a constellation
centered around that root and are “nearest neighbors” or “relatives”—the
offspring of that root, as it were. Hence, in order to fully understand a word,
all the words to which it is related via its root should be consulted—it is
through them that the word gains dimension and depth. This is one of the reasons
why the Koran can never be translated fully into other languages—that language
would have to map the constellations of words and concepts exactly, and this is
impossible for any language other than Arabic itself.

Moslem
or muslim means a person who has
surrendered, who obeys God and His commandments. Taslim means surrendering, and also “giving the trust to the right
place, to be safe from disasters and calamities.” Salaama is “safety, security, wholeness, perfection, to be free
from fears and anxiety, salvation, liberation, and happy outcome.”

Similarly, salaam
is “peace, comfort, auspicious results, freedom from mortality, friendship.” To
salaam, i.e. salute, a person is to
wish him well, to wish peace, comfort and completeness (shedding faults and
attaining perfection) on him. The Koran speaks of Paradise as Dar as-salaam, or “the Abode of Peace.”

Sullam,
again from the same root, is synonymous with miraj (ascension, ladder), and its meaning of “staircase” points to
the method that purifies and elevates man, that exalts him and leads him upwards
to Truth. Musallam is “that which has
no doubt, whose truth and rightness is acknowledged by everyone.”

Musalama
is “to be in peace, peacefulness, tranquillity, to be gentle, well-tempered and
compassionate.” These attributes summarize the Way of the Prophet, and point to
the adoption of Mohammedan morals by Moslems.

Taslim
and tawaqqul (trust in God) have been
traditionally misunderstood in many cases. It has become a habit to use these
as excuses for laziness and a blind fatalism. But these words were never
intended to mean sloth, lethargy, or surrender to the caprices of our ego and
obedience to the devil. Rather, they signify living in harmony with the laws of
the universe which are the commandments of God, and acting in accordance with
them. They mean not to force, not to use force, not to violate the unfolding of
the universe by opposing its flow. More clearly, they imply that man should not
try to force or bend the laws of the universe for his own self-interest, and
should revise—or transform—his relationship with the universe and its Creator from being one of egotistical benefit into a
relationship of wonder, admiration, and love.

It is impossible to exaggerate the importance of
this constellation of words associated with Islam. For they provide us with the
key to the most realistic assessment of what Islam is and is not. We can obtain
the shortest and closest approach to the truth and living essence of Islam by
examining their content.

To summarize the details given above, to be a Moslemthe one who lives ‘Islam’is to
achieve tranquillity, peace, security and happiness; to be well-mannered and to
possess splendid moral conduct; to attain perfection, liberation and
fulfillment by purifying oneself and unification. It also expresses the
path—the truth and rightness of which is beyond doubt—that leads to these
goals.

A FAITH FOR ALL SEASONS

“There is only one religion on earth,” said
George Bernard Shaw, “but there are a hundred versions of it.” William Blake
was of the same opinion: “All religions are one.”

Islam claims to be that archetypal religion.
Many of the prophets mentioned in the Koran are referred to as “Moslems,” which
means that the prophets of earlier religions submitted to God, the One and the
same God, even though the religious precepts revealed to them were
different—localized rather than universal. Adam, the first man, was also the
first prophet and the first to embrace Islam (“submission to God”).

In time, however, the teachings of the earlier
prophets became both obsolete, because the times and circumstances for which
they were valid were superseded; and corrupted, because the original teachings
were unable to survive untampered. As people mistook the manifold attributes of
God for God Himself, they began to call these attributes “gods,” thus slipping
from monotheism into polytheism. Entropy is a cosmic law ordained by God, and
human affairs are not exempt from it. Thus, a degeneration occurred that
necessitated the renewal of true religion from time to time. This reiteration
was performed by the prophets.

Finally, God sent the perfect religion that is
valid for all mankind as long as it exists: they are coterminous. He chose
Mohammed as the vehicle for conveying this religion. As the Prophet remarked:
“I was sent to complete admirable conduct.” Islam was not different from all
the other true religions, as is evidenced by its acceptance of all earlier
prophets, such as Moses and Jesus; it was merely their most mature, most
perfected and streamlined form. For example, just as Christianity was a
continuation and—in certain respects—a consummation of Judaism, Islam is a
continuation and consummation of both Judaism and Christianity. Similarly, it
is an extension of and improvement upon Buddhism, and so on. And although the
earlier religions were tribal and local, addressing a small part of mankind for
a restricted period of time, Islam was intended by God to be truly universal—as
valid for an American, say, of the 20th century, or an astronaut of the 25th
century, as it was for the little Arabic community to which it was revealed 14
centuries ago. God has made this unmistakably clear by the following verse:
“Today I have perfected your religion over you” (5:3).

Although God, having revealed the final and
most perfect religion, has abrogated all earlier manifestations of religious
devotion—and in this sense other religions will not be accepted by God—Moslems
recognize that it is part of the divine purpose to maintain diverse religious
communities in coexistence. Because: “We would have created you in one faith if
We had so desired,” God states in the Koran (5:48, 10:99, 11:118); “We made you
of diverse faiths so that you might get to know each other” (49:13). Ultimately,
the decision to enter Islam is a private, individual choice, made on one’s own
free will after proper investigation. But Islam recognizes in all religions its
earlier forms, its predecessors, its ancestors. And this is why Islam is the
“religion for all seasons:” it encompasses and embraces all earlier religions
and traditions, because they are its own. Nevertheless, Moslems also reserve
the right to point out their errors in cases where they have strayed from the
true path, since it is the most developed version of the best aspects of all
religions. In our age, when a truly universal community is needed to unite the
“global village,” A truly Islamic society is characterized by its tolerance for
other faiths and its acceptance of diversity, testified to by the history of
Islam which spans fourteen centuries.

Entry to the religion of Islam is extremely
easy. One need only repeat the Word of Witnessing (Kalima al-Shahada) or the Word of Unification (or Unity) (Kalima at-Tawhid ).

The Word of Witnessing is: “I bear witness that
there is no god but God, and that Mohammed is His servant and Messenger.”

The Word of Unification is: “There is no god
but God; Mohammed is His Messenger.”

Anyone repeating these Words (especially the
first) wholeheartedly and with a sincere belief will enter Islam.

Let us pause for a moment to ponder what their
recitation entails.

1

. The first part of
both formulas is the faith of monotheism: there is only One True God, the Lord
of all Being.

In ancient times, people used to worship
stones, trees and many other deities. They idolized these objects; that is,
they attributed to them properties superior to what they intrinsically
possessed. They projected upon them godlike attributes, and from this it
followed that obeisance was owed these objects. The thesis of monotheism, on
the other hand, was that only the supreme power, the Creator of the Universe,
deserved the unconditional allegiance and worship of man.

We are very far from such a primitive mentality
today. Nobody in this age would worship the sun or the moon or a piece of
stone. Our emancipation and sophistication, however, has blinded us to certain
facts, and has led us to underestimate the power with which the human psyche
tends to deify entitites.

The truth is that even in this day and age, we
tend to ascribe overimportance to things, to invest them with a significance
which they do not possess. This deification is all the more insidious because
it is largely subconscious and so goes unnoticed. We may not worship a piece of
wood, but we have our own idols and bogeymen that hold comparable sway over our
thought processes.

In order to bring to light what is involved
here, it is necessary to make the following definition: Anything which a person
loves in excess and/or fears in excess is that person’s god, or idol. (This
also includes attribution of power to that thing.)

When considered in terms of this definition, it
will easily be seen that even the most confirmed atheist might well be, in real
life, a polytheist or idolater.

Love and fear are two basic components of the
human psyche. But it is also true that we love certain things more than others,
and fear certain things more than others.

Even if you believe in One God, if you love or
fear something more than Him, that thing is your god. That is, you are setting
up another god, you are associating a partner, with God. If you do not believe
in God, your deification is all the more total and indefensible.

Looked at in this light, it at
once becomes apparent that we all pay allegiance to various pantheons of idols.

The movie star, the rock star, the football
player or the political figure to whom we are overly attached may all be
considered our gods, a fact recognized even in common speech where such persons
are referred to as “idols.”

A man may be so deeply in love with a woman
that he “worships” her. A person who washes and polishes his car excessively
is, without realizing it, “deifying” his car. At the very least, he is making a
fetish out of it, which is already in the realm of the sacred. Another who has
a great fear of his boss, or his debtor, or the local bully, has unconsciously
taken these as idols.

In this sense, almost anything can serve as a
deity: money, science, a work of art, alcohol, political power, sex, oneself, one’s
reason, or even one’s TV set, to name but a few. These are all false gods,
however; they usurp our devotion without being worthy of it.

All this goes to show that if you do not
worship the sun, the moon or the stars, you are not automatically disqualified
from idolatry or polytheism. In fact, there are indications that ancient and
primitive peoples understood this broader definition of a god quite well; they
were just more prosaic in their choice of idols.

Now the basic tenet of monotheism in the face
of all this is that there is only one Being worthy of such adoration and fear,
who commands man’s absolute allegiance and respect; and that is the One and
only True God, the Creator of the Universe and everything that is in it.

Another danger is that even though we believe
in God, we might show excessive reverence to something that we fancy will draw
us close to Him. This may be an icon, an object, an angel, or a human being.
All of these have their proper place; it is only when we go too far that we run
the risk of associationism.

We should, in that case, avoid associating
anything with God. We should dissociate Him from and glorify Him above
everything else, for He is so far beyond all finite things, no matter how
great, that He simply does not bear comparison with any of them.

This, then, is the meaning of “There is no god
but God,” and from what has been said it can be seen that it is as valid a
claim in our modern age as it was in ancient times, for it is timeless.

2

. This claim, however, is equally
the profession of a Jew or a Christian, who also believe “there is no god but
God.” The second part of the formulas is exclusive to the Moslem: “Mohammed is
the Messenger of God.”

Now what do we mean by this?

This means that we accept
Mohammed as the true guide, exponent and conveyor of religious knowledge. It
means that we willingly accept—and undertake to carry out—all the commandments
and prohibitions of God as revealed through His Prophet.

These two formulas (the two Words), then,
constitute a pact, a covenant (the final covenant, in fact) between man and
God. It means that we accept the Koran, as revealed to Mohammed via the angel
Gabriel, and the Prophet’s additional explanations, advice, and example (his
Way, or Sunnah) not contained
explicitly in the Koran.

The latter, though not included in the Koran,
have come from the same blessed mouth that delivered the Koran. If we accept
the veracity of the latter, we are duty-bound to do the same for the former,
provided it is an established fact that a certain word has issued from him.
Such sayings (hadith) of the Prophet
are called Traditions.

The Koran itself testifies to the absolute
trustworthiness of the Prophet: “He does not utter anything of his own accord”
(53:4); “Take what the Prophet gives you, and beware what he prohibits” (59:7);
“If you love God, love and obey [His Prophet], and then God will love you”
(3:31); “You have a good example in the Messenger of God” (33:21).

Indeed, Islam rests on two legs that are
inseparable: the Koran, and the Way of the Prophet. And just as the Koran is
the constitution for all humanity, the Messenger of God is the prophet of all
human beings—though they may not know it.

It has been remarked that there are two
versions of the Koran: the first is “the silent Koran,” which is the written
Koran we all know. The second, “the Koran that speaks,” is the Prophet himself.
For try as we might to fathom certain parts of the Koran and behave
accordingly, we cannot do so without the concrete example of the Prophet, of
whom his wife Aisha once remarked that “His conduct is the Koran.”[15]

Furthermore, Islam has to be accepted in its
totality: “Do you accept a part of the Koran and deny another part?” (2:85)
That would be similar to accepting only certain parts of a whole, living person.
The living example of the Prophet, therefore, has found divine sanction in the
Koran itself, and it is noteworthy that movements which refuse part or all of
his Radiant Way have invariably become harsh and intolerant (a prime cause for
lamentation in the West), for they thereby unwittingly reject his legendary
gentleness and tolerance.

A Universal Faith

Islam is a universal religion: it is not the
religion of one nation or race, but the religion for all humanity. Of course,
it had to be revealed somewhere on earth, and this happened to be an Arabic
community in the 7th century AD. But God has explicitly indicated that
henceforth, Islam is to be a religion for all humanity, not for this or that
tribe, race or nation. This means that anyone can practice it, anywhere and at
anytime, no matter what nation or culture one belongs to.

Care should be taken at this point not to
confuse Islam per se with the
cultural and historical milieu in which it has traditionally been embedded.
With all respect to its birthplace and the noble people who live there, we
should be careful to segregate the religion and its precepts from elements of
local custom. We cannot all become Arabs or ride on camels, but then Islam does
not require us to. What it does is set down precepts that will lead to the
present and future happiness of human beings regardless of local color. It is
natural that every locality and culture will find its own self-expression. But
beyond a plethora of ramifications, the basic rules are what count. Einstein’s
Theory of Relativity does not state that everything is relative. It states that
there are things and relationships which remain invariant under
transformations, and seeks to understand them. In the same way, Islam is
invariant and of perennial use to human beings, and should not be confused with
the countless individual actualizations which cannot help but differ.

A Churchless Faith

There is no church in Islam, no monkery, and no
monasticism. Between a person and God, there stands nothing. Religious scholars
may deal with legal or exoteric matters, and spiritual teachers may give
esoteric instruction; but they are human beings like ourselves, and do not
mediate between God and man. They do not constitute a clergy. No one has the
right to come between man and God or to exercise power in God’s name. This is
the most intensely private of relationships, and since God has, with this
religion, made known to humanity His requirements concerning the most important
things, everyone knows what to do without the intermediary of a church. One can
be clean and pure and practice one’s faith without a church, for one is
accountable to God, and to God alone, who stands in no need of any other
representative.

Closely related to this is that Islam does not
sacrifice matter for spirit, or vice versa. Both are of equal importance. Both
are part of man’s makeup, and man will be crippled if he neglects one side for
the sake of the other, just as a bird with only one wing cannot fly. Spiritual
advancement does not entail renunciation of the world, nor do worldly
possessions—provided we possess them and they don’t possess us—preclude
spiritual/afterworldly progress. The two must go together. Extreme
asceticism—like all extremes—is exceptional, and not advocated by Islam, which
points to the “Middle Way.”

A Religion of Hope

Islam is a religion of hope. Its stance as
regards man and universe is basically optimistic. Original Sin, an ineradicable
residue of sin that is genetically passed on down the generations, does not
exist in Islam.[16]
Furthermore, sin and evil do not have the connotations in Islam that they
possess in other religions. Sin is not a source of irremediable guilt; it is
rather in the nature of faults, errors or mistakes which may issue from a human
being as a matter of course—provided, of course, it is not intentional and
deliberate. As for evil, this is considered to be badness, rather than a
metaphysical entity so exaggerated that it has the power to overcome good. As a
matter of fact, unmitigated “evil” as the term is understood in the West does
not exist in Islam—the closest term to it would be “ill” (sharr).[17]
Badness is entirely manageable in Islam. Even the Devil, who in some religions
is powerful enough to rule this world, only has the power to whisper and
suggest treachery to those who heed him; beyond this, Satan cannot actually
compel us to do anything.

Two sayings of the Prophet will serve to
clarify the optimistic position of Islam. “Every child is born a Moslem; it is
only afterwards that his parents and environment make him the follower of
another religion.” This means that every child is born already saved —not already damned. It is only actions in later life
that may cause the fall of a person, who comes into this world pure and
untainted. (“Moslem” here means Islamic morality and beautiful conduct, rather
than any conscious acknowledgment of Islamic precepts on the part of the child;
i.e., Islam is that pureness.)

“Suppose you want to plant a tree, and you know
for certain that the End of the World is near (in other words, that that tree
has no chance of growing). Nevertheless, go
ahead and plant that tree.” This is optimistic: no matter how bad a
situation may appear to be, one is encouraged to act with hope. God has
declared: “My mercy is greater than My wrath,” and the Prophet has explained:
“I was sent as a mercy to the worlds.” No matter how sinful a person may be and
how destitute he may feel as a consequence, the door of sincere repentance and
the resolve not to consciously repeat a sin will most certainly lead to divine
mercy, absolution, and salvation.

A Natural Religion

Islam is a religion tailored to mankind’s
needs. It fits Arthur Koestler’s description of “a religion whose content is
perennial but not archaic, which provides ethical guidance, teaches the lost
art of contemplation, and restores contact with the [divine] without requiring
reason to abdicate”. It does not go against the grain, and dovetails with the
natural disposition and requirements of human beings. For this reason, it is
referred to as “the religion of natural disposition.” (It should not, however,
be confused with the historical Deism of Voltaire and Locke, which, in Pascal’s
famous phrase, brings the subject up to “the God of the philosophers,” but
cannot take the step to “the God of Abraham”. Philosophy might bring us to
God’s doorstep by accepting His existence, but we need a revealed religion to
pass beyond the threshold and learn anything further.)

A Faith of Compassion

As human beings, we are the stewards and
gardeners of creation. Islam requires us to show compassion for the tiniest
being, to partake in the attribute of the Merciful (Rahim), of which the counterpart in India is “the Lord looking down
in pity” (Avalokiteshvara). There is
in Islam something of the Buddhist ideal of the Boddhisatva, who renounces Enlightenment until the liberation of
all beings, with the emendation, however, that in order to be able to save
someone, one has first to attain salvation oneself—”The candle cannot burn the
moth, unless it is first itself on fire,” to use a Sufic expression. Islam is
wholeheartedly in agreement with the Buddhistic concept of compassion (karuna).

Islamic Epistemology

Distinction should first be made between
exoteric and esoteric knowledge. Exoteric knowledge deals with the outer
aspects of things, and esoteric knowledge with the inward.

In Islam, there are two sources of exoteric
knowledge: reason (aql ) and
transmission (naql ). Hence, we have
the rational sciences on the one hand, and the transmitted (or revelatory) sciences
on the other. The first are the positive (posit-ive) sciences, such as
mathematics, physics and chemistry, which have little if anything to do with
religion directly.

Transmittedor normativesciences are those
branches of knowledge that do not lend themselves to easy discovery by reason
and have to be accepted as revealed; these are the religious sciences such as
Koranic exegesis, Prophetic sayings, and code of law (fiqh). Yet even here, there is room for reason to operate.

Reason, or intellect, is one of the greatest
gifts God has given to man. Relying on input in the form of impressions or
sense-data from the external world, it allows man to reach correct conclusions
regarding that world. It enables man to survive therein, to build sciences and
civilizations.

Yet there are things which we inevitably accept
on hearsay. Science itself is of this nature, for no single human lifetime
could suffice to repeat all the experiments of science, or rediscover from
scratch the sum total of human knowledge accumulated over thousands of years.

Now this is as true for the religious, or
spiritual, sciences as it is for physical science. The question then arises: to
what extent should reason be exercised in religious matters, and at what point
should one refrain from doing so further?

This subject was much debated in the early
period of Islam. The solution that yields the greatest benefit is this: where
there is an explicit injunction of the Koran, and/or a reliable precedent of
the Prophet, it is useless to argue any further; that line of action should be
followed. For instance, if God has commanded us to perform the five daily
Prayers, mere reason cannot explain why He has done so, nor why there are five
Prayers rather than, say, six. We must take these as given, or received, and
continue from there.

Where a parallel can be drawn to a Koranic or
Prophetic injunction even if an identical case cannot be found, it is fruitful
to do so. Finally, if there is a unanimous consensus within the Islamic
community (meaning, in practice, a consensus of the scholars) regarding a
certain matter, that should be followed.

As a matter of fact, what has been outlined
here is none other than the four foundations of Islamic law (fiqh, meaning “comprehension”): the
Koran, the Way, analogy, and consensus.

This is where the Four Schools of Law come in:
Islam has enough flexibility to allow a certain latitude in some matters. The
four founders of these schools (Shafi’i, Abu Khanifa, ibn Hanbal, Maliq) were
all respectful towards one another’s derivations. Yet in the end the schools
differ little, and the variations pertain to matters of secondary detail. The
Khanifite school is perhaps the most liberal and tolerant of the four.

One can choose to follow any one of these
schools, and its deductions and guidelines can be implemented. For anything
further, one is free with impunity to employ one’s reason, provided one is
sufficiently well-versed and competent to do so.

The important thing is to maintain a fine,
healthy balance between reason and transmission, thereby having the best of
both worlds and avoiding destructive interference between the two.

In societies where Islam predominated, it was
quite natural for people to adopt Islamic law as the legal code governing them.
In individual cases, it is up to the individual to adopt a particular school
for one’s personal conduct. What should never be forgotten is that the Koran
and the Prophet laid down general rules only; their implementation in specific
cases is a matter for individual discretion, with the schools providing
religious guidance in matters of detail. The Divine Law (sharia) is an individual matter. In societies where the population
is predominantly Islamic, people may choose to be governed by an application of
Holy Law to the social sphere, in which case the right of religious minorities
to be bound by their own religious laws is respected.

As for esoteric knowledge, this lies mainly in
the domain of Sufism. It, too, can be divided into two parts:

§Direct or non-dual (tawhidi:
unitary) knowledge: Immediate or sympathetic perception, in which the
object-subject distinction is transcended or nullified in some respect. One
then knows something in the same way as one knows oneself or part of oneself.
Distinct categories that fall under this heading are the inspirational (ilham), revelatory (wahy), intuitive (kashf )
varieties of knowledge, and knowledge gained through veridical dreams.

§Information
or material related to the attainment, realization and states of the first kind
of esoteric knowledge.

The Five Pillars of Islam

Once one has entered the Islamic religion,
there are many religious observances one is required to perform. For
convenience, however, these have been summarized under five headings, called
the Five Pillars of Religion. But before anything else one must consider
morality, which is their foundation. Attempting to practice religious precepts
without perfecting one’s moral conduct is like building a house on
quicksand—the more you build, the faster it disappears. Any religious or
spiritual advancement can be realized only on the basis of exemplary conduct.

With this reservation in mind, the five pillars
of Islam are as follows:

1.Saying
the Word of Witnessing. This provides our entry into Islam, and has already
been discussed above.

2.Performing
the five daily Prayers. These are the (pre-)Dawn, Noon, Afternoon,
(post-)Sunset and Evening Prayers. Although we call them “Prayers,” this does
not mean that we open our hands to God and ask Him for this or that. This is in
fact done, but only after the main course of the Prayer has been performed. We
call this “Prayer” in English only for want of a better word. This involves
worshipping God by reciting certain sections from the Koran while standing,
genuflecting, straightening up again, prostrating and sitting. This cycle is
then repeated, usually in multiples of two. These Prayers are the most
important of a person’s activities as a Moslem.

The five daily Prayers comprise a total of
forty cycles, but only half this number is obligatory. Moreover, although there
is a definite time for each Prayer, obligatory Prayers can be postponed and
performed even when they are Overdue—they can be performed together and done in
the evenings, for instance.

While a single cycle can be extended almost
indefinitely if desired, the average time it takes is about a minute. If we add
five minutes for the Ablution with water (which is a prerequisite of Prayer),
we end up with less than half an hour daily for taking time out from the rat
race, to God, being alone with God in worship and devotion, and returning to
normal life refreshed and replenished.

Now for the question of language. Ideally, the
recitations within Prayer should be in Arabic. This is because of the necessity
to recite chapters from the Koran, which is untranslatable; recitation in any
other language would be recitation of a translation, not of the Koran itself.
And yet... Since we translate the Koran in order to understand it, if we insist
on understanding what we recite in Prayer, there is no obstacle to doing so
(though strict literalists would probably disagree). God understands all
languages, and the first thing He looks at is the honesty of a person’s
intention and the earnestness in one’s heart. He does not judge people
according to their race, or language, or nationality. To Him they are all His
servants. If you can, recite Prayer in Arabic. If you can’t, recite it in
whatever language you are able to. This applies even to the proper name of God.
If you can’t bring yourself to say “Allah,” then say “God,” or “Gott,” or
“Dieu,” or whatever.

3.Fasting
during the lunar month of Ramadan. This is to abstain for a period of 28 days
from food, sex, and profane things until sundown in order to nurture and raise the
spirit.

4.The
Alms-tax, or Poor’s Due. The poor have a right to a portion (usually
one-fortieth, or 2.5%) of our assets. This is to give the poor their due. Islam
combines the spiritual with the material, the individual with the social.
Hence, wherever performance of the Prayer is mentioned in the Koran, this is
almost invariably accompanied by payment of the Alms-tax, and the latter is of
comparable importance with the former.

5.Pilgrimage
(Hajj). Every prosperous Moslem must
go to Mecca and circumambulate the Kaaba (lit. “Cube”) once in his lifetime.

Needless to say, there are numerous details and
spiritual subtleties associated with each of these, but none of these are
insuperable or too difficult to learn for the mentally healthy. In fact, mental
health is their prerequisite. The mentally ill and children who have not yet
reached the age of puberty are under no obligation to perform them.

The Six Pillars of Faith

The Five Pillars of Islam pertain to action.
But what are the fundamental tenets of belief? These, too, have been summarized
for convenience, and constitute the Moslem’s Creed:

“I believe in God; in His Angels, His Books and His Mesengers; in the
Day of Judgment; that whatever destiny befalls us, good and ill, is from God;
and in the Resurrection after Death.”

Optionally, one can add:
“in Heaven and in Hell.” This recitation is capped by repeating the Word of
Witnessing.

Let us now look briefly at the meaning of this creed.

1.Belief
in God is self-explanatory: there is a One that has created all being, that
is beyond all conception and comprehension, even beyond the beyond.

2.God’s
Angels are nonphysical, sexless, conscious entities that carry out his
orders, maintain the laws of the universe, praise God constantly, and communicate
His messages and commandments to mankind.

3.God’s
Books have been revealed by His Angels to His Prophets and thence, to
mankind. They contain knowledge of the divine that is not easily accessible to
man’s reasoning or experimentation, but which he nevertheless needs to know and
act upon. These comprise a total of One Hundred Pages, revealed to various
prophets at different times, and the Four Major Books: the Torah revealed to
Moses, the Psalms revealed to David, the Gospel revealed to Jesus and the Koran
revealed to Mohammed.

The earlier books each contained a part of the
Koran and its teachings. However, they were not designed to last, and
consequently did not survive in their original form. The Koran, which
encompasses everything in the earlier books and much more besides, is designed
to survive unchanged till the end of time.

The Koran has
effaced some matters that were more clearly expressed in the earlier books, and
has made explicit other things which they mentioned only covertly. There are
several reasons for this. The first is that the Koran, as mentioned above,
abrogates certain aspects of earlier sacred law—for instance, the Islamic
Divine Law is easier and more lenient than Jewish Law. Another reason is that
some of the statements in earlier books, while true, can be easily
misunderstood, and wrong action follows upon such misunderstanding. A third
reason is that the Koran lays emphasis on the improvement of right action, and
hence gives further details not available in earlier sources.

4.God’s
Messengers are those human beings chosen by God to convey His messages,
orders and advice to the rest of mankind. Their honesty, veracity and
truthfulness is beyond doubt; otherwise they would not have been entrusted with
such a burden or responsibility. The first prophet was also the first man,
namely Adam, and the last prophet was Mohammed, to whom True Religion was
revealed in its final, its most mature and complete, form.

Tradition has it that there have been 124
thousand prophets, of whom 28 have been named in the Koran. Since True Religion
reached its peak or zenith with Mohammed, there will be no further prophets.
The difference between a prophet and a messenger in the present context is that
a messenger comes with new dispensation, a new version of Holy Law, whereas a
prophet does not; he merely refreshes and reiterates the version of Holy Law
revealed by the last messenger preceding Him. Every messenger is also a
prophet, but not every prophet is a messenger according to this definition.
Every prophet bringing a Book is also a messenger—Moses and Jesus, for example.

5.The
Day of Judgment or the Last Day is the day when all human spirits will be
resurrected and gathered together after bodily death; will be judged according
to their good or evil deeds during their life on earth, and will then be
dispatched to their proper destination: Heaven or Hell. Hence, closely related
to this are:

Resurrection
after death, which will occur for the judgment of souls. “This world,” said
the Prophet, “is a field to be sowed for the next;” and as we sow, so shall we
reap. No good deed is in vain, and no evil deed is without eventual, inexorable
punishment.

Heaven
and Hell, which are the final destinations of human beings in the
afterlife. Righteous and virtuous persons will go to Heaven, a place of
blessings, but evil persons will be sent to Hell, where they will receive
punishment. There are Eight Levels of Heaven and Seven Circles of Hell,
according to the degree of virtue or sin a person has accumulated.

6.Good
and ill destiny from God: Whatever befalls us is either a response from God
to our actions, or a trial from God. God has preordained a good recompense for
good deeds and retribution for evil ones. In addition there are certain things
which we as humans cannot change, try as we might; but even here it is not an
iron law that operates, for we can pray to God, who in His compassion may grant
our prayers. Further, a perceived ill may be a blessing in disguise; we only
know that God is the source of all.

Fate and predestination are matters that have
frequently been misunderstood, and can easily bog one down in philosophical
conundrums. The best course in this regard was pointed out by the Messenger of
God to a group of his Companions: don’t waste time thinking or arguing too much
about it. Man cannot know what is predestined by God—only God has that
knowledge. But man has his orders from God, and it is his duty to carry these
out, not to become entangled in paradoxes of the mind. (More about this article
of faith below.)

Having summarized the
Six Pillars of Faith in this way, it is next necessary to ask: what does it
mean to know these? Supposing we knew them by heart, would it be of any use if
we failed in right action, action inspired by these principles?

“All that we are,” begins the Buddhist Dhammapada, “is the result of what we
have thought.” Our most deeply held beliefs actively shape our lives and
influence our destinies.

Sow a thought, reap an act;

Sow an act, reap a habit;

Sow a habit, reap a character;

Sow a character, reap a destiny.

And therefore:

Sowing
a thought reaps a destiny.

So, placing the Six Pillars at the center of
our faith should lead to more than mindless re-enactment of the Five Pillars of
Religion. Merely “going through the motions” is a bane that deadens the soul
and stultifies one’s faith.

The Six Pillars of Faith are a precondition for
performing the Five Pillars of Islam. But this is not enough.

Suppose you believe in God, that God exists and
is One. So what? Unless you recognize that He sees and hears whatever you
do—that He can read your innermost thoughts—and adjust your conduct
accordingly, your faith will be of no avail.

So what if angels exist? What matter is it to
us? It is not enough to just believe in God’s angels. We should, like those
angels, implement God’s orders perfectly and meticulously. Our actions should
be in moral conformity with angelic behavior.

It is not enough to believe in God’s books, to
love and caress the Koran. We should study it to learn what it contains, and
strive to carry out its instructions. Our morality should be, like the
Prophet’s, an image of the Koran.

Granted that we have faith in God’s prophets,
is this of itself sufficient, or should we not rather try to be exemplary human
beings and model servants of God as they were? If we love and cherish Mohammed,
are we able to follow in his footsteps, to conform to his Way?

Supposing we believe in the Judgment Day, do we
arrange our actions and lives bearing it in mind, preparing for it properly, or
do we go on living just the way we used to before we started believing in it?

What is good for this world is not necessarily
good for the afterworld. But what is good for the next world is also good for
this world. If we arrange our affairs with the other world in mind, we shall
find salvation in both this life and the afterlife.

We believe that destiny, whether good or ill,
is from God. But do we take the precautions necessary to ensure that we shall
receive a good recompense? What percentage of the deeds required for a happy
fate do we perform?

We believe in resurrection after death. What
preparations have we made for that terrifying day, when there will be no escape
and no place to hide? Have we taken, or are we now taking, measures to escape
bewilderment and punishment?

The Pillars of Faith leave us face to face with
an ethical choice. They require us to adopt, even transcend, the moral conduct
of angels. They invite us to invest ourselves with the morality of God’s
prophets and chosen ones.

A child can recite the Pillars of Faith. What
is much more important—and difficult—is to live them; to complement theory with
practice. To be Islamic.

Grading of Actions

Actions, or deeds, are graded according to the
merit or sin they entail. Here, the intention
behind a deed is as important as the deed itself. The main division is between
Allowed (halal) actions, which gain
merit (sawab), and illicit or
Forbidden (haram) deeds, which are
sinful (gunah). These are further
subdivided within themselves to yield five gradings:

§Obligatory
or mandatory (fardh)

§Recommended
(wajib)

§Neutral
(mubah)

§Disgusting
(makruh)

§Forbidden
(haram)

Each person will be
judged in the afterlife according to the grades s/he has accumulated during his
lifetime. One good deed and one bad deed of equal value cancel each other. Of
course, God’s Attribute of Justice (adl
) requires that even the finest distinction not be missed in Judgment, so a
grading over 100 points would be closer to the truth. These are, however, the
main divisions.

This grading system is very similar to that
existing in our educational institutions, and suggests that the whole world is
a school—a scene for our training, testing, and maturation.

On Destiny

The question of predestination has long
occupied the minds of human beings. The philosophical dilemmas one can easily
land oneself in have caused many to turn to atheism. Yet there is no need for
this; what is necessary is to maintain a proper perspective.

People find it difficult to reconcile the
horrors we see in the world with the concept of a loving God. If God is
compassionate, the argument continues, how come He foreordains some to Heaven
and others to Hell?

Obviously, there cannot be responsibility
without freedom of choice. If God had not given man this freedom, He in His
justice would not hold man accountable. The very fact that a system of rewards
and punishments exists bespeaks man’s freedom to choose between good and evil.

This freedom is a sine qua non for the fulfillment of the purpose of existence. Yet
it is also a heavy burden. Most of the evils we observe in the world are a
product of man’s wrong choice, not God’s. It is easier to blame one’s Creator
for one’s own misdeeds than to shoulder responsibility and solve them. But this
is to add insult to injury, and only exacerbates our eventual punishment. To
say: “God created me this way. What can I do? I would have acted good if He had
created me good,” is the worst form of cop-out. God is not responsible for
stopping the evils of this world—we
are. For the worst of them are man-made. Furthermore, God has made us the
stewards and custodians of this world, and it is our duty to take proper care
of our planet.

But if God is omniscient and all-powerful, how
can He punish our misdeeds? Aren’t these predetermined by God, too?

The Islamic response is as follows: God has
donated a small portion, a fragment, of His will to each individual human
being, which a person is entitled to exercise freely. This partial or
fragmentary will of man can choose to comply with or oppose the total or
universal will of God. If God forced
us to make an ethical choice, only in that case would He and not us be
responsible for it. And in fact, we shall be held accountable only for our free
moral choices and actions, not for the situations we may find ourselves in
through no fault of our own. A moral choice made under adverse circumstances,
however, is of greater merit than the same choice under conditions of ease.

Note here the existence of a very fine, delicate
point: the will exercised by each of us has been loaned to us by God; it is a
fragment of God’s own will. This is a
very great responsibility: a human being can, under certain conditions,
influence the fate of millions of human beings for good or ill. Hence, it is
only normal that man should be held accountable for its misuse.

This also means that we cannot always let
events follow their course. Under certain conditions, moral conduct requires us
to intervene. Suppose you see a person who has fallen into a river and is on
the verge of being drowned. You cannot say: “This is what the Universal Will
wants,” and allow him to drown. You have to exercise your individual,
fragmentary will, and try to save him by whatever means you find at your
disposal. God, who has placed you in the presence of that situation, has
delegated to you the resonsibility to do something about it.

Freedom of the fragmentary will of the
individual is a right granted by God which He does not violate. Rather, He
causes the choice to be fulfilled with complete disregard as to whether it is
good or bad. People can carry out the worst crimes as well as the best deeds.
Man proposes, God creates and delivers the result. It is only in the afterworld
that the final reckoning will occur. But occur it will, for man is capable of
committing crimes so horrible that it would be impossible for God’s justice to
let them go without punishment.

Since God is all-knowing, He knows that a
person will, at a certain time, do such-and-such. But He does not interfere.
Omniscience does not imply omni-interference. The Universal Will does not
infringe the right of the fragmentary will to decide independently.

To be sure, “the ways of the Lord are
mysterious.” Not everything in His creation lends itself to easy explanation by
our reason. We may comprehend only to the extent we are able to. Hence, the
best thing is to steer clear of unproductive arguments on predestination, and
concentrate on carrying out the clear orders God has given us. This, and
nothing else, is to our ultimate benefit.

The Mark of a True Servant

One of the pious among the Children of Israel
used to spend his time in seclusion and worship. One day, the Lord told Moses:
“I have decreed that that servant of mine belongs to the people who go astray
(the Folk of Hell). This is so whether he worships Me or not. Go tell him.”

Moses went to this man, and informed him of the
divine decree. The man praised the Lord, and said: “My only wish is that my
Lord should be pleased with me. If that is what He wants, what can I do? I
neither know nor understand such matters. Let Him put me in Hell, as long as He
is pleased with me.”

Whereupon the Lord transferred the man from the
people of error to the people of right guidance (the Folk of Heaven). He again
sent Moses to the man to inform him of the situation. He said in reply: “Well,
to tell the truth, I don’t know about this, either. I only ask for His
pleasure. As long as He is pleased with me, my Lord knows best. He can place me
in Heaven or Hell, as He likes. That is His affair. I don’t know such things.”
And he continued his worship, unswervingly and unperturbed.

Now this is the way a true servant of God
should be. We should not concern ourselves with matters of rebellion or bliss.
A servant need only fulfill the requirements of his station, that is, of his
servanthood. As long as he does so, anything is possible. We are assured of
only one thing: “Whoever does a particle’s-weight of good will find its
recompense (reward), and whoever does a particle’s-weight of evil will find its
recompense (retribution)” (99:7-8). This can occur both in this world and in
the world to come.

Poison Berries

Suppose we find ourselves on a desert island,
and there are various kinds of trees with berries and fruit on this island. Some
of these are good to eat, while others are poisonous. Even if they may taste
good initially, they will make us sick and kill us in the end.

How are we to distinguish between the
nourishing berries and the poisonous ones? On a desert island, the way to do
this is to look for signs of bird peckings on the fruit. Those berries that
have been eaten by birds are good to eat. Those without peck marks on them, we
would do better to stay away from.

Now suppose, as a further step, that all the
fruit has been labeled, indicating, as the case may be: “this is good, eat it”
or “this is poisonous—danger!” Then we are freed even of the necessity for
inspection.

Now if, under these conditions, we were still
to pick and eat the fruit that is poisonous, would this be our fault, or would
it be (heaven forbid) God’s?

Of course the fault would belong to our selves.
Now God, in His divine wisdom, has created both nourishing and poisonous fruit
as a condition of existence. But it is our responsibility to choose and eat the
nourishing kind.

Good and bad are exactly like this. God has
created the possibility for both good and ill; but He wants us to choose the
good, out of our own free will. This He desires, not for His sake —for He is in
need of nothing—but out of His love for us, for our own sake and our own good.

God has clearly labeled everything, indicating
whether it is good or bad, via His prophets in all ages and finally, with the
Prophet of God and the Koran. Now if, after all this, we still go and choose
ill, who is to be held responsible?

All that comes to us leads us back to God. What
matters is our proximity to our Lord, like the perfect servant who is not
interested in Heaven or Hell, but in pleasing his Lord, the Creator of all.

God, then, creates both good and bad; but we
are responsible for whatever evil befalls us. As for the good, this is a gift
to us from the Lord in His infinite compassion. So it is necessary to act
mindfully and live responsibly, to give our life the attention and care it
deserves. And this can only be done by firmly grasping the “strong cord” or
“strong handle” of God’s commandments. “Grasp God’s rope firmly,” advises the
Koran (3:103). And this rope, this cord that saves, is nothing but God’s orders
and prohibitions as related to us in the Way of the Prophet and the Koran.

SOCIAL AND ECOLOGICAL
VISTAS

The Saint or the Revolutionary?

In his famous book, The Yogi and the Commissar, Arthur Koestler once highlighted the
contrast between these two types. The social spectrum, he said, ranges from the
infrared to the ultraviolet. At one extreme, the infrared, stands the
Commissar, who casts his lot with materialism. At the other extreme is the
Yogi, drifting into the ultraviolet, for whom only spiritual matters count.
“The Commissar,” says Koestler,

believes in
Change from Without. He believes that all pests of humanity, including
constipation and the Oedipus complex, can and will be cured by Revolution, that
is, by a radical reorganization of the system of production and the
distribution of goods; that this end justifies the use of all means...

[The Yogi] believes that the End is
unpredictable and that the Means alone count. He rejects violence under any
circumstances... He believes that nothing can be improved by exterior
organization and everything by the individual effort from within...

Between these two extremes are spread out in a
continuous sequence the spectral lines of the more sedate human attitudes.
[But] the real issue remains between the Yogi and the Commissar, between the
fundamental conceptions of Change from Within and Change from Without.

It is easy to say that all that is wanted is a
synthesis—the synthesis between saint and revolutionary; but so far this has
never been achieved. (...)

Neither the saint nor the revolutionary can save
us; only a synthesis of the two.[18]

Furthermore, it is not
enough to take half of each in an “arithmetic mean” that stands halfway between
the two; a unique combination is required wherein sometimes the characteristics
of one and sometimes the other predominate. For instance, all the undesirable
traits and many of the assumptions of the Commissar are unacceptable, while the
passivity one might tend to associate with the Saint is likewise a hindrance.
What is called for is a synthesis in line with the principle of the Golden
Mean.

It is understandable that Koestler thought this
synthesis had never been achieved. Had he looked more closely into Islam, he
might have discovered that its Prophet combined, during his lifetime, not
merely the vocations of saint and revolutionary, but those also of prophet,
statesman, ruler, military commander, and chief justice. Unique among human
beings, the Prophet embodied both spiritual/religious and social/political
leadership. As Lamartine rightly observed:

Philosopher,
orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational
dogmas; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire,
that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be
measured, we may ask, is there any man greater than he? (History of Turkey .)

Ever
since, the individual and the social, as well as the material and the
spiritual, have gone hand-in-hand in Islam.[19]The reason why the leading French intellectual and former
Marxist, Roger Garaudy, embraced Islam is that Christianity emphasizes the
person and spirit while neglecting society and nature, and Marxism overvalues
the social and material at the expense of the individual and spiritual, whereas
Islam strikes an exquisite balance between them all—precisely the kind of
synthesis Koestler had been looking for.

“Attend,” said the Prophet, “to worldly matters
as if you were never going to die, and to matters of the otherworld as if you
were going to die tomorrow.” Indeed, Islam gives equal emphasis to the material
world as to the spiritual world. And its social aspect is highlighted in
another Prophetic saying: “Whoever goes to bed sated while his neighbor goes
hungry is not a believer.”

In each society, there are laws and
institutions that regulate dealings between human beings, and indeed Islam has
developed its own legal code and institutions. But before and behind all laws
stands moral conduct, without which no law can exist or survive, and society
can only sink into chaos. Hence, Islam places the greatest emphasis on moral
conduct, which prefigures the peace and well-being of the individual and
society.

In mathematics, certain geometrical figures can
be used to tile a surface perfectly, without any space left between them. For
instance, you can tile a surface in this way with triangles, squares or
hexagons, all of which fit neatly together. In the case of circles, however,
spaces are left, and since social nature “abhors a vacuum,” some tiles will
expand at the expense of others, i.e., some individuals will expand their
sphere of action to the detriment of other individuals. Now Islam seeks to tile
the social fabric perfectly, with human tiles that are entirely harmonious with
each other. The details of moral conduct specify the nature of this meshing,
and determine whether it will be perfect or not. If the moral conduct specified
for everyone is lacking in one or more respects, or if it fails to be
implemented, the social gears and wheels will not mesh perfectly, leading to
strains and groans—perhaps even to the breakdown of the machine.

Big trees from little trees do grow: serious
social ills are the consequence of the accumulation of countless individual
misdeeds. Further, as the Prophet said: “What is harmful in large quantities is
also harmful in small quantities,” and vice versa. From this it can be seen
that what is harmful on the micro level to the individual is also going to be
harmful on the macro level to society—hence, the Islamic ban on the consumption
of alcohol and narcotic drugs, as well as similar injunctions, is aimed simultaneously at the improvement of the
person and society.

Indeed, most of Islam’s prescriptions have this
dual aspect. For instance, Prayer, which at first glance appears to be the most
personal and spiritual form of worship, also acts as a salve on interpersonal
relationships because of its uncanny power to relieve stress.

Fasting purifies the soul, tempers greed, and
rids the body of impediments, all at the same time. But further, it activates
the sense of compassion for the poor and hungry, and awakens feelings of
charity towards those in need.

The Pilgrimage, in addition to its more
religious facets, acts as a giant congress for all the people of the world,
where Moslems discover that their brethren from across the globe are not
fundamentally different from themselves—and, by implication, neither are human
beings of whatever religion, nation, race, or walk of life: they are their
equals in creation.

Needless to say, each and every Islamic
prescription for conduct has its social aspect. Everyone should practice them
all, for leaving out ingredients from a delicious recipe can only detract from
its taste.

Islam and Synergy

One is reminded here of anthropologist Ruth
Benedict’s distinction between cultures of low synergy and high synergy. It was
Benedict’s insight that human personality bears the stamp of its specific
culture, and that there is a correlation between social structure and character
structure, especially aggressiveness. Aggression, she said, is marked in
societies where the interests of the individual and the group are at odds with
each other. “The problem is one of social engineering,” according to Benedict;
“Nonaggression occurs not because people are unselfish and put social
obligations above personal desires but because social arrangements make these
two identical.”[20]Using synergy in its meaning of combined action (where the
whole is greater than the sum of its parts), she distinguished between cultures
of low synergy, in which the social structure provides for acts that are
counteractive and counterproductive (borrowing a term from physics, we might
call this “destructive interference”), and cultures of high synergy, in which
such acts are mutually reinforcing (“constructive interference”). Life
in low-synergy societies is a zero-sum game; when one person wins, everybody
else loses. In high-synergy cultures, on the other hand, the name of the game
is “nonzero sum;” there is no true loser because everybody wins.

Benedict found that in societies where
institutions did not exist to redistribute wealth, which has a natural tendency
to become concentrated, life was difficult and individuals predominantly
anxiety-ridden and aggressive, and vice versa. This had nothing to do with the
level of economic or technological development; people might lead a happy and
fulfilling life even in the most primitive society, while widespread
suffering—with consequent fear, aggression and violence—might exist even in the
most advanced one. In short, high synergy means high peacefulness and low
aggression, while low synergy means the opposite.

Now what has all this to do with Islam?
Everything. For this religion aims to take society at whatever level it finds
it and to transform it into a high-synergy society. It provides the social
institutions for what Benedict called “the syphon system:” an economy where
wealth is constantly channeled away from points of concentration and spread
throughout the community. Where everyone is provided for, poverty is not a word
to fear, and people can be much more secure, easygoing, and hence peaceable. In
an age when senseless violence and sexual depravity is being pumped into our
cultural bloodstream by the media (as if there weren’t enough to go around to
begin with), we could do worse than take the heed of Islam, with its
prescription for nonaggression and peace.

The Ottomans, one of the finest examples of
Islamic civilization, provide a case in point. For instance, they had “charity
stones,” pillars in the middle of the street slightly taller than a human
being, on top of which a rich person might place a donation for the poor. A
needy person coming along could then reach up and collect it; in this way,
donor and receiver remained anonymous to each other, and the dignity of the poor
was preserved from injury. No one was reduced to begging. Since theft was
unheard of, there was no danger that the money entrusted to the mute stones
would vanish. What they accomplished as a matter of course, we cannot even
dream of today. The equivalent in this day and age would be an open bank
account; but can you imagine the deposits not being stolen before the poor and
needy got to them?

The essence of Ottoman ethics was this: treat every human being as if he or she were
a jewel. This means that a person should be delicately handled, not just
like glass which might break easily, but as a being of infinite worth. You will
not find this stated in history books, which seldom do justice to this aspect
of Ottoman life, but such was in fact the ideal, and—more often than not—the
practice. And this is the kind of morality we need today; in an overcrowded
world we stand even more, not less, in need of such conduct.

Ecology and Islam

Another salutary innovation of the Ottomans was
of a resoundingly ecological nature, long before ecology was ever heard of in
the West. The quintessence of ecology was, of course, first expressed by the
Koran: “Eat, drink, but do not waste” (7:31). The earth’s resources are enough
for everyone, as long as they are not squandered mindlessly. The “green” choice
is primarily an ethical choice; the science of ecology may tell us that the
destruction of the environment will lead to the destruction of man, but it does
not tell us why such self-destruction is wrong or bad. A suicidal or nihilistic
mentality that regarded life as a disease would be quite justified in trying to
eradicate what it regarded as undesirable.

In accordance with the Islamic precept to “show
compassion and tolerance towards not merely human beings, but all of God’s creatures,”
the Ottomans saw to it that hungry wolves in the wild were fed carrion. This
not only protected villages from being raided, but the Ottomans, in full
consciousness, prevented this predator from entering the “endangered species”
list because, according to their conception, “every living being is precious.”
The means for this was the unique institution called the foundation. Thus, for
example, the Ottomans had foundations for the preservation of birds, cats,
mongrels, wildlife, etc.—a delicate ecological sensibility informed all their
actions. Looking at the funds and foundations devoted to the preservation of
nature in the West today, one cannot help but remember their ancestors in a
less ecology-conscious age.

Indeed, Islam teaches us to save even a fly or
a scorpion in distress, so long as it does not intimidate us directly. The
reason for this is not the ecological precept that diversity of species leads
to stabler ecosystems. It is that these creatures bear life, which is worthy of
respect in itself. The purpose of ecology, too, is best served by this
approach.

The Alms-tax

We cannot go into all socially and ecologically
oriented Islamic observances here, but shall consider, in conclusion, that most
social form of worship, the Alms-tax institution.

Among the aims of Islam are social justice and
the fair distribution of wealth, and the alms-tax is the primary—though not the
only—means to achieve this goal. Everyone who is rich beyond a certain Measure
(nisab) is required to give
one-fortieth of their holdings—not just income—to the poor. This measure is 96 grams of gold, or the
equivalent amount in cash (about 1200—1996 US—dollars) and/or valuables, and
one must have been in possession of this amount for at least one year, over and above one’s debts and daily
requirements. Of course, this does not preclude other forms of charity,
such as the “end-of-fast” (fitr) alms
given at the end of the month of Ramadan, or individual handouts or donations.

Let us now take a closer look at what is
involved in the alms-tax, and how it is considered in Islam.

The word for alms-tax, zakah, literally means “cleansing” or “purification.” The
implication is that money or property, even when honestly earned, is unclean;
it contains a residue which makes it “filthy lucre.” It is, if you like,
contaminated, almost radioactive, and unless it is decontaminated it will harm
its owner. Now this impurity can only be cleaned away by giving it to the poor.
This portion of one’s wealth is their rightful
property. One’s earnings are then cleansed, and the “uncleanness” drops
away from the money given—but only if the recipients are poor. If, for
instance, a well-to-do person withholds, accepts or takes the alms-tax, it will
jeopardize his entire fortune in the sight of God.

In order to understand more clearly what this
means, let us return to Benedict’s syphon system, and compare the body social
to the human body. This is a valid comparison, because human beings living in a
society are connected to each other by multifarious ties. In our present-day
atomistic societies, which sociologist David Riesman once characterized as “the
lonely crowd,” there is a tendency to compare society with the molecules in a
gas. But that is not a society; that is “a bunch of people living at the same
address.”

Just as wealth has a natural tendency to become
concentrated in society, blood in the body is always being drawn in by the
heart. But just think what would happen if the heart did not pump this out
again. Moreover, this blood that is drawn in is spent blood; it is contaminated
with waste matter and toxic materials, and has to be circulated through the
lungs (and also the kidneys) for aereation or ‘purification’. This enriched
blood is then redistributed to all parts of the body through capillaries. Extremities
of the body, such as the hands, feet, ears and nose, are the first to get cold
in bad weather.

Now picture what would happen if such
extremities were to freeze. The heart, being centrally placed, would not be
affected directly, yet it, too, would suffer because the entire body would
suffer. And if fresh blood could not reach cells that are the end users of
oxygen, anoxia and rapid death would set in.

In our analogy, then, the alms-tax serves the
dual function of the lungs plus kidneys, and the capillaries; it both purifies
the money circulating in the economy, and siphons it to those parts of the
social body that receive the least ‘blood’. Thus, not even the lowliest person
will starve for want.

(This does not mean that Islam advocates
shiftlessness. Islam frowns upon laziness and begging, and encourages everyone
to work to the best of their abilities. The alms-tax is not intended to operate
like the welfare system in the USA, where freeloaders bask in the sunshine of
Social Security. There are many cases, however, where people remain destitute
in spite of all their struggles.)

In the Koran, the alms-tax is mentioned in the
same breath as Prayer, and is accorded equal importance. The following saying
of the Prophet serves to highlight its priority: “If the alms-tax of the rich
were not enough for the poor, God would have given them other means of
sustenance. If there are any poor who go hungry, this is only because of the
cruelty of the rich.”

This means that, if the alms-tax were given
with due care, it would put an end to hunger and want. Hard as it may be to
imagine, the alms-tax points the way to nothing less than a peaceful
revolution. The concept of a “negative income tax” to be given to the poor,
entertained some years ago in the United States, shows that modern social
thinking on poverty is finally catching up with the alms-tax, instituted 14
centuries ago.

The alms-tax is usually given on a
person-to-person basis, although there have been times in history when it was
collected and dispensed by the state (increasing, if necessary, the customary
2.5%). This enhances the probability that the donation will reach the truly
needy, while the inherent “uncleanness” involved makes corruption unlikely in a
country keeping the faith.

A few other sayings of the Prophet will help
clarify the status of the alms-tax:

The alms-tax has been made obligatory in order that
property be cleansed and beautified. Whoever does not give the alms-tax has
defiled his property, and is in Hellfire in the afterlife. A society that does
not give the alms-tax will be plagued by droughts and crises. Property for
which it is not paid will be ruined on land or at sea. Whoever pays the
alms-tax protects himself from the evil of his property. After Prayer, the most
virtuous worship is the alms-tax. If a person does not pay it, neither will his
Prayer be accepted.

It is not simply the dirt of money that is
swept away, however. Hardness of heart, the contamination of greed and
callousness, is removed from the donor, giving way to feelings of charity and
compassion. Like Charles Dickens’s Ebenezer Scrooge, one undergoes a reform and
conversion. It begins to dawn that ever-increasing consumption, consumerism and
anthropocentrism are not what being human is all about.

The Day of the Commissar

It is not too much to say that even today, the
effects of world poverty can only be eradicated by an imaginative application
of the alms-tax within the world community—i.e., on a global scale. The social
ills of the world, the polarization between the haves and the have-nots, can
only be curbed by a similar donation on the part of rich nations to poor
nations. The “peaceable kingdom,” all mankind living together in peace and
harmony, would then become possible.

“If a wolf slaughters a lamb in [some far-off
land],” said Omar, the second Caliph, “Omar is responsible.” It is only by such
a sense of responsibility that we can resolve our global problems. “Our true
nationality,” noted H.G. Wells, “is mankind.” No matter what nationality we
belong to, we are human beings first and members of that nationality
afterwards. We need to bear this constantly in mind, and to take the
precautions necessary for preserving our “global village.” The Prophet’s saying:
“If a person dies of hunger in a land, the whole country is his murderer,”
should now be reconsidered with the whole world in mind. To recall Benedict
again: “One’s life experience is different if economic institutions make it
impossible to be hungry as long as anyone in one’s world has food at all...”[21]
God knows we have the wealth, the technology, and the wherewithal to achieve
this, were we but to set our minds to it and to examine our consciences
carefully.

Unless this is done, and unless per-capita GNPs
are drawn toward a median point amongst the rich and poor nations, crises will
be inevitable not merely domestically, within nations, but on an international
scale. Beyond a certain threshold, revolutions and wars will spread like
wildfire. What was not given freely, with compassion and charity, people will
seek to wrest by force. And that can only pave the way for the Day of the
Commissar—the day when he, and he alone, will rule.

It does not take great intelligence to see
this. But the solution is primarily a matter of the heart, and a heart is what
we in the world seem to be most lacking today.

ISLAM AND THE WAY OF THE PROPHET

God, who created human beings in the best of
statures, did not leave them without guidance. In order that they should earn
their place in the next world and felicity in this by living a good, straight
and honest life, He has sent Books via His messengers. He desires His Books to
be understood and lived, and His orders and sanctions to be heeded. To live the
straight path explained in the Books in accordance with the limits set by
Revelation has been called “the Way” of the Prophet (sunnah). Any believer who wholeheartedly accepts such an exemplary
life takes his place among “the People of the Way.”

Prophethood and the Way are part of each other.
He who does not understand the Way cannot be expected to understand
prophethood.

The Holy Law (shariah) is based on two great foundations: the Koran, and the Way
(sunnah) of the Prophet.

The Koran is the essence of Islam. It is the source
of the Straight Path. It is the miracle of our Prophet. It is the certification
of his prophethood and a sign which is valid until the Last Day. The Way, on
the other hand, is the explanation of the Koran and its decrees and the
clarification of its principles; it is the complement of Koranic laws. Once its
authenticity is known, the Way is a binding law and a source of guidance.

Part of
the Way is clear revelation coming from the Archangel Gabriel, i.e. the Koran.
Another part is the reflection of inspiration in the Prophet’s heart. A further
section is based on the independent judgment of the Prophet. His judgment
depends on knowledge of the Koran, on Islamic law, on revelatory lights that
filled his heart, and on Esoteric Knowledge (ilm ladunni). God says: “Read, in the name of your Lord who
created, created man from a blood clot. Read: Your Lord is Most Bountiful, who
by the pen taught man what he did not know” (96:1-5). The Prophet would state
his opinion on every occasion. If Revelation met these opinions with silence,
this signified God’s approval. For God says: “By the star that draws near, your
friend [the Prophet] is not in error, nor is he deceived. He does not speak out
of his own fancy. This is indeed an inspired Revelation” (53:1-4).

The Companions of the Prophet memorized,
protected and contemplated the Koran, laid the foundations of Islamic law, and
passed it on to the next generation (the Followers) in its original form. In
turn, the Followers passed it on to the Followers of the Followers, who came
after them. Thus, in every century, a large portion of the Community has passed
the heritage on to each succeeding generation. The Lord Almighty declares: “It
is We who revealed the Koran, and We Ourself shall preserve it” (15:9). Due to
this fact, the Koran has reached us without any change, distortion or addition.
Similarly, the Companions, by memorizing, understanding and contemplating the
words and meaning of the Way, delivered it to the Followers. The transmission
will continue in this manner to the end of time.

The Way, as the second foundation of Islam, is
the explanation of the Koran. “We have revealed the Koran so that you may
proclaim to men what has been revealed for them, and that they may give
thought” (16:44). Further: “Thus We have inspired you with a spirit of Our will
when you knew nothing of faith or scripture, and made it a light whereby We
guide those of Our servants whom We please. You shall surely guide them to the
right path: the path of God, to whom belongs all that is in the heavens and the
earth. All things in the end return to Him” (42:52-53).

Our Prophet explained the verses of the Koran
sometimes verbally, sometimes by his acts, and sometimes in both ways. For
example, although Prayer was made obligatory during our Prophet’s Ascension,
the number of cycles (rakah), the way
it should be performed, the times of Prayer, its optional and mandatory parts,
are not mentioned in detail in the Koran.
These intricacies of Moslem Prayer, which Moslems are ordered to perform by the
Koran, were explained by the Way of our Prophet. Again, the time when the
Tithe, or alms-tax, is due is not explained in the Koran. Nor are the
proportion, the amount, and what should be included in the alms-tax. All of
these were specified by the Way.

As one of the Companions said: “Revelation was
coming to the Prophet, and the Archangel Gabriel was also bringing the Way to
explain that Revelation.” As a great scholar states: “The Way of the Prophet is
the explanation and elucidation of the Koran.” All respected scholars have
concurred that the Way should be regarded as a guide in religion. The Koran and
the authenticated Way, that is, everything which is proven definitely to come
from the Prophet, are our guides.

The Lord tells Mohammed: “Say: ‘If you love
God, follow me. Then, God will love you and forgive your sins. God is
All-forgiving, All-merciful’“ (3:31). Further, it is stated: “I swear by your
Lord, they will not be true believers until they seek your arbitration in
disputes, do not doubt the justice of your verdicts, and submit to you
entirely” (4:65). These verses cover the judgments of the Prophet based on both
the Koran and the Way. Again, according to this verse, it is not sufficient to
simply accept what is brought by the Koran and the Way. It is also necessary to
obey, believe and keep the faith wholeheartedly.

The following Tradition, or saying, of the
Prophet is of outstanding importance: “Know that I was given the Koran, and
along with it an equivalent thereof. Be aware that in the near future, some
fools made arrogant by prosperity and high status will say: ‘Your duty is to
stick to the Koran.’ They will cause you to depart from the Way by saying:
‘Accept as lawful whatever the Koran says is lawful, and consider as prohibited
whatever it says is prohibited.’“

To stray from the Way of the Prophet is to ruin
half of religion. Departure from his Way means that many of the Koran’s verses
will not be understood. Therefore, this damages the first foundation of the
religion as well.

In his Farewell Pilgrimage, the Prophet said:
“I have left you two things. As long as you abide by them, you will not deviate
from the straight path. These are the Koran and the Way.” As can be understood
from this Tradition, consultation of the Way is as great a requirement as that
of the Koran in the derivation of guidelines.

The Companions of the Prophet have unanimously
agreed that his Way and Traditions (sayings) are guides in religion, and have
acted accordingly. On everything left unmentioned in the Koran, the judgment
derived from the Way forms the basis for action. The Lord declares: “Whatever
the Prophet gives you, accept it; and whatever he forbids you, stay away from
it.” This verse makes clear that, on every point which is not mentioned in the
Koran, it is required to observe the decision of the Way.

Everything encompassed by the Way rests on
Revelation. Therefore, every Moslem is bound by all rules based on Revelation.
Since our Prophet is bound by the decrees in the Koran, those who accept the
religion of which he is the prophet are placed under a similar responsibility.

Without a doubt, the Koran is superior to the
Way. Since obedience to God and obedience to His Prophet are mentioned together
in the Koran, the Way of the Prophet finds sanction in and takes its strength
from the Koran. The Way cannot be understood without the Koran, as the Koran
cannot be understood without the Way. The two form a complete whole.

The Pilgrimage to Mecca, for example, is one of
the Five Pillars of Islam. God has stated in the Koran that it is incumbent on
all Moslems. Yet it is the Way of the Prophet which explains that the Kaaba is
to be circumambulated seven times, and that the distance between the two hills
is to be traversed, likewise, seven times. No matter where we look, it is clear
that Islam cannot be realized unless the Way is observed properly.

Both the Book and wisdom (hiqmah) have been given to the Prophet by God (4:113). According to
the learned scholars of Islam, the “wisdom” stated here is none other than the
Way of the Prophet.

It is the Prophet who has perfectly understood,
visualized, and recited every subject in the Koran. The Prophet, who explained
the Koran explicitly, implicitly, by analogy, hints and references to its
context and details, both for his contemporaries and for future generations, is
the source and leader in all religious knowledge. He has informed the essence
of the Way not only in his utterances, but also in his behavior, custom,
lifestyle and contemplation.

The verse: “If you love God, follow me. Then
God will love you” has important implications. It points to the fact that every
state, action and saying of the Prophet was consistent with the consent of God.
The Traditions and the Koran are valid for everybody everywhere, in every time
and condition.

The
Koran bears a thousand Korans within itself, and offers several things at once
in the form of a nucleus. From this viewpoint, the Traditions are similar. The
culture of the Koran and the Way of the Prophet is to transfer, infuse and
diffuse Islamic morals and conduct into every part of our lives.

Wherever the Way is absent, neither is Islam
present. In the Chapter of Light, it is stated: “... obey the Messenger, so
that you may be shown mercy. Do not think that unbelievers will be spared the
wrath of God... An evil fate awaits them” (24:57). This underscores the
importance of obeying the Prophet and considering him the exemplar in words,
deeds, orders and prohibitions.

Anyone who claims to be a believer should
remain within the bounds of the Koran and the Way of the Prophet. These should
be the mainspring of his life. This can be done by observing and carrying out
the rules of Islam, and warming the hearts of human beings to Islam with his
Way.

May God grant a complete understanding of Islam
to us all. We glorify You. We have no
knowledge except what You have taught us. If we forget and make mistakes,
forgive us, do not punish us. Treat us with Your compassion. Accept our prayers
for the sake of Your Prophets. Amen.

HEALING THE BROKEN MIRROR:
THE KORAN AND ITS OPENING CHAPTER

The Fractured Mirror

In our age, we are faced with an “atomization
of consciousness:” the world, or rather our mental mirror of it, has exploded
into smithereens, and the result is a ruination that belies the magnificence,
the infinite interrelatedness, of the universe which is its object. In our
effort to understand the world, we have divided and subdivided it ad infinitum into disjoint categories
having little or no relationship with each other. As Yeats prophetically
declared at the beginning of this century, in lines well-worn precisely because
they are so succinct:

Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;

Mere
anarchy is loosed upon the world.

It is a common human
failing to confuse our descriptions with that which is described. As Alan Watts
used to point out, the map is not the territory; the transparent film of
divisions and abstract concepts which we overlay on the “seamless web of the
universe” and which constitutes our mental picture of it is not the universe. This is true of analytical thought, and even
of language. Our fragmented picture of the world is not the world itself, and
if this fragmentation has progressed to the point where our appreciation of
reality is seriously impaired, we need to heal it, to make it whole again.

Un-fracturing

This project is called ‘Unification’ (tawhid ) in Islam. At the simplest
level, of course, Unification means the recognition that “God is One.” But on a
deeper, subtler level, it means that the rigid compartmentalization we impose
on the world is a mental construct of our own. The gridwork of latitudes and
longitudes, for example, is useful for navigating our globe; but they are
invisible when we look at the earth from space, for the simple reason that they
don’t exist in reality. The seamless structure of the planet is echoed in the
interconnectedness of the universe. Quantum physics has unwittingly taken a
step toward rediscovering the “great chain of being” positing countless links,
which used to be appreciated in the West; the discovery of “nonlocality” in
recent years has lent strength to the view that seemingly unrelated parts of
the world are, in fact, connected.

Before the discovery of nonlocality, gravitation
was recognized as such a connecting medium in physics, and it still retains the
advantage of being effective on the everyday and macrocosmic levels, rather
than only on the quantum level. In the field of ecology, Barry Commoner framed
one of the basic principles of ecology as: “Everything is connected to
everything else.” If a fire breaks out in the Amazon forests, for example,
everybody everywhere suffers, even though they might not realize it. In recent
years the science of chaos has not only revealed order masquerading as apparent
randomness, it has also shown that intuitively negligible quantities or
perturbations can have counterintuitive consequences out of all proportion to
their own scale. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions can have unforeseen
consequences in seemingly unrelated locations. Thus, our sciences have reached
a sophistication and sensitivity where previously unnoticed correlations,
connections and correspondences are now beginning to be recognized. As
Wordsworth summarized beautifully:

All things near and far

Hiddenly

To each other connected are

That thou canst not stir a flower,

Without troubling a star.

Thus, we find that our
science has caught up with our art, in an unexpected vindication of Keats:
“Truth is beauty, and beauty truth.” This is the deeper meaning of Unification:
that the three cardinal principles, truth, beauty, and goodness, are ultimately
one, that they are but aspects of the One Ultimate Reality, the Ground of all
being. And this is the vision that we have to recapture if we are to escape
schizoid grief: that the only atom in the universe—a-tom in the sense of “indivisible”—is the universe itself, that it
is a joyous celebration of infinite Unity and existence, rather than a hell of
irreconcilable, broken fragments. This
world which we presently inhabit is the chaos,
the world apparently ruled by chance in which few things make sense. Our task
is to transform it into cosmos (an
ordered universe) by purifying our consciousness and integrating the world,
discovering the infinite interrelatedness of phenomena with God at the helm, in
the end realizing that the world is, and in fact was, a cosmos all along.

Unification

Let us recapitulate. The universe is a seamless
unity. But we do not ordinarily perceive it that way. From childhood onwards,
man begins to inhabit a world of multiplicity. On this multiplicity, which is
already a “given,” we next superimpose the artificial abstractions and
divisions of analytical thinking. In other words, whereas our objective should
be to move towards unity, we move a further step towards fragmentation. This is
not to deny the utility of analytical thought. But it should be counterbalanced
by a synthesis. We should integrate
what we have previously differentiated.

The following analogy may be helpful:
ordinarily, we look at the world through a pair of glasses. Even if our vision
is 20-20, our spectacles still have smooth glass in place of lenses. Now
imagine that the glass or lenses has multiple fractures, but is still held in
place (say by a transparent plastic coating). When we look at the world through
these glasses, we see borders, separations, reflections, even multiple images
of the same object, that do not exist in reality. Analytical thought can be
compared to this.

Suppose now that we take off the broken
glasses. We will now be able to view the world without an obstacle. Yet we
still cannot perceive the Truth, the seamless unity. As the great mystical poet
William Blake said: “If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would
appear to man as it is, infinite.” The fact that we do not ordinarily perceive
the world in this way implies that a sensory/noetic “filtering” is taking
place. Aldous Huxley took this cue from Blake to suggest in The Doors of Perception that the sense
organs and the mind act as a “reducing valve”. So how can we regain a full,
complete view of reality?

Islamic Sufism suggests that this is possible
by Unification. We must bear witness to the unity of God, unify the universe,
and unify our selves. It further suggests that these three are connected.
Picture the universe we live in as a horizontal axis. This is the universe as
man perceives it in his ordinary, everyday self. But there are other levels of selfhood
that are possible, which can best be pictured as ordered along a vertical axis.

Now to every state or level of the self there
corresponds a different state of consciousness, which yields a different state
of reality to our perception. Hence, Islamic Sufism suggests that the key to
“cleansing the doors of perception” actually lies in self-purification, by
which the “ladder of unification” is climbed until one perceives the clear
light of Unity, of Truth, at the summit.

The Source of Bliss

Ideally, Unitary thought transcends all
dualisms and divisions. The dichotomies of matter and spirit, mind and heart,
object and subject, inner and outer are thus left behind, and one passes beyond
all artificial distinctions to the seamless Unity of Truth. This is not a
matter of ‘either/or’, and beyond even ‘both/and’. To borrow a concept from
quantum physics, it is “tunneling” beyond the crack between opposites that
originates them, and finding oneself in a pure Unitary state. The Hindus had a
name for this state that described it beautifully: sat-chit-ananda, Infinite Being, Consciousness, and Bliss. And the
Buddhist name for it, which is equivalent to the fana of the Sufis, described how it can be attained: Nirvana, or “snuffing out” the
candle—the extinguishing of all selfish desires in oneself. The result is
inexpressible, but Blake made an attempt at it, though all such attempts are
doomed to failure:

To see the world in a grain of sand,

And Heaven in a wild flower;

Hold infinity in the palm of your hand

And eternity in an hour.

Ultimate Reality,
which is known to us by the more familiar name of “God” (the Divinity), is the
source not only of all being, but of all happiness—such that even a small step
towards God will lead us out of grief into a great enhancement of happiness. If
man, therefore, turns his back on God and starts walking, he doesn’t stand a
chance; there is no power in the universe that can deliver him from despair.

Truth, Beauty, Goodness

“God is beautiful,” goes a Tradition, “He loves
beauty.” Truth (Haqq), Beauty (Jamal ) and the Good (Birr) are divine names and attributes of
God in Islam. Hence knowledge or science, which deals with truth; aesthetics,
which concerns itself with beauty; and ethics, or moral philosophy, must
complement and complete each other, since they reflect different facets of the
same Unity.

The ancient Greeks, despite their polytheism,
came very close to this insight. In Greek thought, goodness and beauty were
identical. They expressed this by a hybrid term, “good-beautiful” (kalokagathia). And Keats took the above
quotation identifying truth and beauty from a Grecian urn. Plato spoke of the
unity of goodness and beauty. The concept has proved remarkably persistent in
Western philosophy, right down to Wittgenstein, who in his Tractatus speaks of ethics and aesthetics as one. And while Kant
wishes to distinguish between knowledge, ethics and aesthetics, a close
inspection of his three Critiques
reveals that he considered ethics and aesthetics one in principle, which
further unite with knowledge at an apex.

Quantum physicist and Nobel Prizewinner Paul A.
M. Dirac combined truth with beauty in his epigraph: “A physical law must
possess mathematical beauty.” “God is a mathematician of a very high order,” he
wrote, “and He used very advanced mathematics in constructing the universe.”
Dirac was able to predict the existence of antimatter by relying on
considerations of symmetry, which is a prime ingredient of beauty (mathematical
or otherwise).[22]
It was on this basis that he asserted: “A theory with mathematical beauty is
more likely to be correct than an ugly one that fits some experimental data.”[23]
Here we stand at the interface between scientific truth and artistic
sensibility, where the simplicity and elegance of a scientific theory take
precedence over cumbersome explanatory devices—just as Kepler’s elliptical
orbits disposed of the inelegant theory of epicycles. It is for this reason
that the Koran declares: “You do not see any imperfection in the creation of
the Compassionate. Return your gaze; do you see any fissure? Look again and
again; your gaze comes back to you, dazzled and tired” (67:3-4). In other
words, if at first you don’t succeed in discerning this perfection, look again,
revise your theories, and finally you will perceive pure magnificence.

The Music of the Koran

Pickthall, one of its interpreters, called the
Koran “that inimitable symphony,” and Arberry, another interpreter, recognized
“the Koran’s undeniable claim to rank amongst the greatest literary
masterpieces of mankind.” Because it is untranslatable, even the most
successful interpretations fall miserably short of the breath-taking beauty of
the original.

The Koran is neither prose nor poetry, but a
unique combination of both. Further, the lilting sing-song in which it is
recited, although unfamiliar to ears accustomed to Western music, highlights
the quasi-musical nature of the Koran. Thus, it combines prose, poetry and
musicality.

At this point we may well remember Carlyle:

All inmost
things, we may say, are melodious; naturally utter themselves in Song. The
meaning of Song goes deep. Who is there that, in logical words, can express the
effect music has on us? A kind of inarticulate unfathomable speech, which leads
us to the edge of the Infinite and lets us for moments gaze into that!

All deep
things are Song... See deep enough, and you see musically; the heart of Nature being everywhere music, if you can only
reach it.

Seen in this light, the recitation of the Koran
is music, “a mystic unfathomable song.” If the universe is the “music of the
spheres,” then so is the Koran, which deciphers the mysterious universe to
human comprehension. It is not, however, any
song; the intonations and cadences of the Koran are all its own.

While the Koran is cast in the form of beauty,
its contents are goodness and truth. As it declares itself: “There is no doubt
in this book” (2:2). “It is an advice to the whole world, to those who wish to
go straight” (81:27-28). “This is a book that discriminates between truth and
falsehood. It is not a joke” (86:13-14). It takes the various strands of wisdom
of all traditions—whether ancient or modern—and, consummately completing them,
weaves them together in a rich tapestry that cannot be improved upon.

When we scrutinize the key concepts of the
Koran, we find that it identifies goodness with beauty. Words deriving from the
root HSN (such as husn, ihsan, hasan)
all have this dual meaning “good-beautiful.” A good deed inherently appeals to
the sense of beauty in human beings. Conversely, bad is identified with ugly,
and is repulsive. Why should this be so? Because human nature is inherently
good, although it does have a propensity for badness as well.

Thus, the moral or ethical distinctions of the
Koran are simultaneously aesthetic distinctions. The beauty intended here,
however, is spiritual beauty more than physical beauty, and points to the fact
that courtesy (adab) and sublime
moral conduct, which are beauteous in themselves, lead to beauty of spirit in the
person who practices them. In Koranic terms, again, “good” is that which is
balanced, while “bad” or “ill” is indicative of imbalance. Justice (adl ) is explained directly in terms of
balance. Cruelty or oppression (zulm),
squandering (israf ), being spoiled
by excessive affluence (itraf ), and
illicit sex (fahsha) all have the
meaning of imbalance and extremism. The Koran, in short, invites us to live by
the Golden Mean, and in each case it clearly outlines for us where this mean
lies.

A second conclusion following from the
inspection of its key concepts is the emphasis laid on “the straight path,” the
path that leads straight to God, Paradise, and happiness. This is the path of
the righteous, of those who do “good-beautiful” deeds. But there is also a second
path: the road that leads to Hell. Hence, the Koranic concept of path may be
compared to a two-way highway: one leading toward God and the other, away from
Him. There are many words for ‘road’ in Arabic, and the Koran uses almost all
of them.

The Chapter of the Opening

The Koran begins with the chapter of “the
Opening.” The Arabic root of its name is FTH, from which also derive the words
“key” (miftah) and “victory” (fath). From this constellation of words,
we may understand that the Prelude of the Koran is a key which opens the doors
to victory, to spiritual conquest, to victory over evil and despair. It is said
that this chapter summarizes the Koran in a nutshell, and it is so important
that it is recited in every Prayer cycle. What could be the reason for this
importance?

I take refuge in God from Satan, the accursed.

In the name of
God, the Compassionate, the Merciful.

Praise be to
God, the Lord of all being,

The
Compassionate, the Merciful,

Master of the
Judgment Day.

You alone we
worship, and you alone we ask for help.

Guide us along
your Straight Path,

The path of
those whom you have blessed,

Not of those
who incur your wrath, nor of those who go astray.

Amen.

Let us examine these
sacred verses one by one, in order to appreciate their meaning more fully. The
main text of the Opening Chapter is preceded by “the Naming,” of which the
second line is invoked more often: “In the name of God...”. The Naming precedes
almost all the chapters of the Koran. The main text of the chapter is ended by
saying “Amen” (“so be it”).

Let us first look at the Naming:

I take refuge
in God from Satan, the accursed.

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful.

The word interpreted as “accursed” above
actually means “stoned” in the Arabic original, from which we understand that
Satan was driven from the presence of the Lord. What God is saying here is
this: “When you want to read my Divine Word, my Book, take refuge in Me from
Satan, who has been banished and driven away from Divine Grace.”

Taking Refuge in God is to seek asylum with Him
from everything that presents a barrier to grace, wisdom, and divine light, and
thus to seek to witness the Presence of God. This becomes possible by the
Knowledge of God. For Satan fears only the heart of the saint. The sun of
Mohammedan Truth which is born in the depths of the saint’s heart burns the
Devil and drives him away.

When a servant sincerely seeks refuge in his
Lord in this way, the Almighty replies: “Fear not. Say: ‘I begin in the name of
God, the Compassionate, the Merciful.’“ It is suggested to start upon any task
by repeating the Naming, for otherwise it may not have an end.

Three divine names are invoked in the Naming:
God, Compassionate, and Merciful. There is reference here to three classes of
God’s servants, as explained elsewhere in the Koran (35:32):

1. Those who
leave their selves in darkness,

2. Those who
brake (control) their selves,

3. Those who
do good works.

God is the Lord of all. Compassion is for those
who control their selves, and Mercy, or a higher elevation, belongs to those
who actively do good works.

We now arrive at the main text of the Opening
Chapter, which is composed of seven verses (the Naming is added sometimes, to
give a total of eight). The first three verses are said to be specific to God
alone, the fourth verse of supplication is shared between God and man, and the
last three verses belong to man—the man of faith. Thus, the Opening begins on God’s
side and ends on man’s side, which shows that man by himself can do
nothing—divine aid has to start with God.

Praise be to God, the Lord of all being.

All the thanks, or praise, of all beings that
may originate in the form of words or deeds belong to the Lord of the universe,
“the Lord of all the worlds.” From this we understand that God has created more
than one world, and man is a world unto himself. When a human being begins to
wonder: “Who am I? Where did I come from, and where am I being led? For surely
my coming and going occur outside my own volition,” that person has attained
the base level of being human. He is then faced with the proposition: “Seek
your origin,” and this search begins by giving thanks.

There are three kinds of thanksgiving: giving
thanks in the language of human beings, in the language of the spirit, and in
the language of the Lord.

Giving thanks in the language of human beings
is the thanks of the ordinary man. This is to thank God for His blessings. A
person is to acknowledge a gift of God, and to use that gift in the proper way.

Giving thanks in the language of the spirit is
the thanks of the Elect. It is done with the heart. The person’s condition is
trained and his conduct is purified.

Thanksgiving in the language of the Lord is the
thanks of the Wise. The Folk of Love give thanks, and are enabled to the light
of unveiling by it. The Folk of Knowledge give thanks, and are enabled to
witness God’s visage.

In short, thanksgiving is to praise the Lord,
to exalt Him. This is why both the beginning and the end of life is praise.

No one can know or give the praise that God is
worthy of. Hence, all salvation is from God. Thanks and praise are due to God
alone, who creates and saves His creatures by His Essence, Attributes, and Actions.

He is the Lord of the Worlds; He trains the
hearts of the Faithful with patience and sincerity, with loyalty and
perseverance.

He is the Lord of the Worlds; He trains bodies
by bringing gifts into existence.

He is the Lord of the Worlds; He trains souls
by displaying His generosity.

The beginning of all creation is the Light of
Mohammed, which is the Universal Intellect, and the world is its explication
and unfolding.

The
Compassionate, the Merciful.

The Compassionate (Rahman) creates and preserves the world, the Merciful (Rahim) saves it. “The Compassionate” is
the name of the eternal past; “the Merciful” is the name of the eternal future.
All things are brought into being and sustained by the Compassionate; God
grants His special grace on a subset of existence with the Merciful.

Master
of the Judgment Day.

God is the Master of “the Day of Religion,” the
Judgment Day. The Judgment Day is the Gathering of souls, the Last Judgment,
and their Dispersal to Heaven and Hell. It is the day when the purposes and
struggles of people is evaluated.

It is the day when the wise gaze upon the Noble
Face of their Lord, when the doers of good works find their reward, and when
oppressors meet their retribution.

The small licenses we are allowed in this world
are removed on that day. That day only the owner of the Station of Praise—the
recipient of the decree: “My Lord will give you of His bounty, and you will be
pleased”—namely, the Prophet Mohammed, will have full authority.

Now follows the verse that proclaims the independence
and joy of the spirit, and indicates worship and the request for help:

You
alone we worship, and you alone we ask for help.

“Dear Lord, we beg you for every help, and we
worship you with the strength you give us. Our worship is not of our own. Power
and strength belong to you. You have helped us, and we have worshiped you with
that help. We look to your grace, and do not trust in our own deeds. We neither
trust our works nor ask for reward; we only worship you. We wish you to grant
bountifully. We have stripped ourselves of every purpose, interest and
relationship. Help us in this condition; we beg for the continuation of this
state. We worship you by your command and beg for help by your leave.
Everything is temporary, only you are permanent.”

There are four ways to worship God: with
desire, with fear, with shame, and with love. The best kind of worship is that
done with love. Unification occurs through the operation of this verse, for it
unites man to God. Asking for aid can only only occur when one has reconciled
oneself with the presence of God’s Prophet (i.e. acknowledged him as such), for
no one goes unto the Lord except by him (or, if one has lived during the reign
of previous prophets, by their mediation).

Guide
us along your Straight Path.

“Dear Lord, guide us to the Right Way with your
aid. Give us guidance to whatever is your plan for us. We beg you to present us
with the path that leads to the Summit of your Unity.”

The
path of those whom you have blessed.

“That path is the road of the Prophet, the
Martyrs, the Righteous and the Perfect. It is the station of knowing you, of
beautiful courtesy. You have given these of your Grace.”

Not
of those who incur your wrath, nor of those who go astray.

“We beg not to be of those who earn your wrath,
who persist in error, who remain stuck in rote Imitation and cannot attain
Realization, who are driven from the gate of servanthood, who are misguided,
progress without deserving it, or show fake psychic feats.”

Amen.

“Please accept our supplication, dear Lord.”

Epilogue

What is it then that we are opened to? The rest
of the Koran—the miracle of God, the Book in which nothing is neglected (6:38)
and which is a guidance and a healing (41:44). And to a proper conscious
understanding of the workings of the cosmos itself: God as the Compassionate
and the Most Merciful. To a state whereby we are healed and not separate from
that healing, remembering Him who continually remembers us.

He is the healer of all wounds, the mender of
all schisms of the spirit. In order to achieve Unification we must apply to Him
alone, using the way He has revealed to us through the Prophet. If we do so,
there can be no doubt that we will receive salvation, no matter how “lost” we
may be, for “well able is He to save.” The broken mirror of our minds and our
psyches can be mended—but only if we remember God again.

ADVICE TO KIM

God created the universe for Man, and Man He
created for Himself. Whatever exists in the universe, He placed under man’s
charge. Contemplating the endless mysteries of this world, man has always been
amazed—completely at a loss to explain them. The ones sensing God’s power and
Glory became thankful, and fell in love with their Lord. Those who took no heed
of this remained unbelievers, denying all.

Well, Kim, your father is one of those who are
thankful. With His hand of power, the Creator brought you from the world of
spirits into this world of forms. You now find yourself in this created world,
the World of Witnessing—that is to say, the observable universe. This universe
is full to the brim with wonders, with its stars, its moons, its suns, its
endless vegetation, animals, and people.

When you wander abroad on some pitch-black
night, you watch the shining moon and the countless stars that cover the sky.
Then you understand how great the Creator is. And in your heart you feel
reverence and peace toward your Lord.

The majestic mountains, the vast oceans, fine
clouds, the insect world, the greenery that clothes the earth... who knows what
feelings of excitement are stirred by these in the depths of that beautiful
heart of yours.

Just as I, too, have wandered with wonder and
awe among these marvels ever since I arrived in this world. This beauty, such
subtleties, awaken in my heart boundless excitement and a love, affection and
longing for our Lord. With these sweet feelings I then seek a place of repose.
Far from common concerns, absorbed in the celestial, do you know what it is
that first comes to mind? Let’s look together at these sublime thoughts and where
they lead to.

From that beautiful heart of yours, you
inquire: “Dear father, what is this universe? This sun, this moon, these stars?
These oceans, these mountains, flowers, insects, this day and this night? What
are these endless forms, and what are they for? Who has made them, and who has
caused them?”

You and I and this huge universe with all it
contains are a limitless boon from Him who created us as a graceful act of
kindness. Everything stands as a witness to His existence and His unity.

Everything in the universe is a sign that
enables us to discover and love this Unity in multiplicity, this Oneness in
diversity. And Man is the noblest and most perfect of them all.

This universe is a testing ground for Man. To
the extent that he draws a lesson from what he sees, he learns and becomes a
man of knowledge and wisdom. He then discovers the heavenly reason for coming
into and leaving this world. Otherwise, he is imprisoned by this universe, in
the end leaving it blind, deaf and ignorant of the Almighty’s purpose.

This, Kim, is what your Lord sent you into this
universe to learn. He endowed your mind with high intelligence so that you may
learn this during your short life. He fashioned you as the noblest and most
esteemed of all creation. With His grace He placed the whole world under the
control of man, and gave him great capacities to know his Creator.

Again as a boon, He informed man of these
truths via the prophets and Books He sent. If not for the grace of the
Almighty, how would we be able to discover these secrets and truths on our own,
wandering astray amongst these infinities?

Even today, you will find many philosophers who
abandon the Book and trust in reason alone, and who are overwhelmed by this
multiplicity, failing to comprehend these mysteries and truths, and are left
empty-handed as a result.

Finally, God gave us the Koran, informing us of
all truths. He has outlined the mysteries and hidden meanings of the processes
in these infinite planes, and has made clear to us our duties in this realm of
multiplicity. And further, out of His grace and generosity, He has counted us
amongst the community of His most beloved servant and messenger, our guide
Mohammed.

You and I, therefore, are on the receiving end
of infinite gifts. This, however, is not enough. It is necessary to increase
our knowledge with science and wisdom as long as we live.

Knowledge is an Elixir of Life that rejuvenates
human beings and makes them beloved in the eyes of people and God. One must,
therefore, drink of it to the full. Otherwise, man without knowledge is little
removed from the beasts.

This is why I am giving you this advice—to
teach you this knowledge and these truths. Each constitutes a lesson informing
you about the truth of these comings and goings in the universe. By
understanding them and acting upon them, you will become truly human, thereby
gaining the approval and love of your Lord. Without them, you will remain a
slave to your egocentric passions.

So I will try to inform your pure heart of
these lofty feelings, taking the Glorious Book as my base. My intention is that
you should become a perfect human being, rather than being carried away by the
glitter and laughter of this sorrowful world, which is really a school—and that
you should know the divine purpose behind your creation, thus becoming accepted
and beloved of your Lord.

In the letters that follow, I shall try to
outline for you the requirements of being a good Moslem beyond the essentials
of worship. It is my hope that you will thus become not merely a pious but also
a saintly person.

1. Unification

Dear Kim,

All prophets have invited people to
unification. To comprehend what this is, therefore, is the first task of
humanity. Do you know what unification is? It is to recognize the Unity of the
Creator of these endless worlds, and to worship Him alone. Although all the
prophets have called human beings to this path, people have strayed from it and
fallen into error with the passage of time. These are all deviations that stem
from ignorance of the science of unification. They are the bitter outcome of
the failure to carry out to the letter the instructions of their respective
prophets.

This invariably happens when man is left to his
own devices. He begins to think in accordance with his own personal
predilections, delving into the realm of dreams and imaginings. And Satan makes
this realm pleasing to him. He becomes lost in the depths of his error, all the
while thinking that he is intelligent and right, unable to discern that he has
strayed. History bears clear and bitter testimony to this.

There have been times when men have worshiped
as Creator the work of their own hands. Sometimes they invented forms in their
imagination and did likewise.

There have been times when men made pictures
and statues of their loved ones and worshiped these, saying: “they will protect
us and intercede for us.”

And then there have been times when men have
worshiped the stars, saying: “God created these stars, which rule the universe.
As they change, the universe changes. Let us worship them, and let them worship
God.”

And many other sects of like nature have
flourished. Men have limited themselves to their intellects and imagination,
slowly sinking into the mud. They have strayed from the truth, bowed to these
constructs and sacrificed to them. They have sworn by their name. And they have
convinced themselves of the rectitude of their reasoning as they did so.

This is why God Almighty has pronounced in the
Koran: “Some among men have associated others with God by worshiping idols. And
they have adored and glorified idols in the same way that they have adored and
glorified God. But the love of God of those who believe in God is greater and
more constant than the love of the associators. If the associators and those
who betray their selves knew that God’s might is invincible on the Day of
Judgment when they will receive punishment, and that God’s chastisement is
intense, they certainly would not associate others with God” (2:165).

And so they earn intense punishment on the Day
of Judgment. Among the pages of history, you will also come across those who
have denied God altogether. Such people have opted for eternal misery.

Therefore, my child, as man has strayed,
God—out of His compassion and mercy—has appointed prophets from among these
communities to guide them to truth. All messengers have invited men to
unification. They have proclaimed the oneness of the Creator and the unity of
Him who is to be worshiped. Indeed, God has declared: “Their messengers told them:
‘We invite you to Unification. Can there be any doubt as to the Unity of God,
Creator of the Heavens and the Earth?’“ (14:10)

“Your God who deserves worship is One. There is
no other deity worthy of worship than Him. He is the Compassionate, the Merciful.”

Now, Kim, if you know all this, you will have
understood the Unification to which all prophets have called. By saying: “There
is no deity but God,” one casts aside all gods and deities unworthy of worship.
With this Word of Unification, one affirms the One God worthy of worship,
without associates and equals, and becomes a sincere Moslem and Unifier. Anyone
who does not accept the oneness of the object of worship even though s/he
accepts the unity of God, and thus worships many things, will be an associator,
not a unifier. Even if he says: “There is no deity but God,” he will only
pronounce his unification rather than living it, and thereby will be guilty of
polytheism.

Unification is a matter of believing in God and
worshiping Him. The matter of faith has been treated in Chapter 112 of the
Koran, the Chapter of Sincerity. When the polytheists came to the Messenger of
God and said: “Is your deity made of gold or of silver? What is he like, how
many is he?”—God sent this Chapter of Sincerity, and declared to His Messenger:
“[My Beloved Prophet,] say: ‘God is One. Everything is dependent on Him. He
neither bears, nor is He born. Nothing is like unto Him, not one.’”

This chapter informs the deluded of their error
in the knowledge of God; it is the essence of the Koran and the basis of the
Islamic religion. Since it is also a comprehensive declaration of faith in the
unification to which all prophets have invited, it has also been called the
Chapter of Unification. It repudiates the many deities of the polytheists and
makes clear that God Almighty cannot be compared to any creature. Thus, the
Chapter of Sincerity is one that explains the theory of unification. On the
other hand, since it speaks of worshiping only one God, it also describes the
practical aspect of unification. Thus the Chapter of Sincerity is a theoretical
and practical whole, and itself combines both these complementary aspects of
unification.

Unification, therefore, is not just a matter of
declaring that the Creator is one, that everything depends on Him, that He is
neither born nor bears offspring, or that he is unequaled and incomparable. We
must also consider its practice, and state and know that He is the only deity
who deserves to be worshiped. Following faith in God, unification is the basis
of practice. Without worship, in other words, unification is incomplete.

The word “One” in the Chapter of Sincerity
expresses many meanings to us. It is one of the attributes specific to God
alone. In other words, the Sincerity Chapter gives expression to a unity that
is unique to God. This unity is not like the oneness of anything else. In the
present case, when we say: “God is One,” we are saying that He is singular in
His Essence, His Attributes, and His Actions.

By “God is One in His Essence,” I mean that God
is not part of another thing or many things, like creatures are. This oneness
is a unity that is specific to itself and not similar to that of created
things.

By “God is One in His Attributes,” I mean that
He is without equal—indeed, there is nothing to which He may even remotely be
compared. That is, He is not similar to any of His creatures, nor does any
creature bear comparison to Him.

And by “God is One in His Actions,” I mean that
He has no partner(s) in what He does. For partnership belongs to the weak,
whereas God is All-powerful. He stands in no need of associates.

And so, when we say “God is One,” we need to
remember His unity in His Essence, His Attributes and His Actions, and should
know His unity in serving Him. Otherwise, you will fall prey to the same
pitfalls as men of previous generations, and be flung into eternal distraction.
This is why the Messenger of God has said: “Say: ‘There is no deity but God’ if
you want to be saved.” This is why the first requirement of Islam is to witness
that: “There is no god except God.” And this is also why this sentence has been
called the Word of Unity or the Word of Sincerity, and why it has constituted
my first letter to you.

You should therefore read the Book of
Unification, our guide in religion, and read it well. For knowledge will help
you traverse the Path.

2. Moral Conduct

Dear Kim,

Morality is a goal of humanity. As to those who
do not reach this goal, there is no way for them to understand either the
nature of being human, or Islam.

A person can experience Islam and full humanity
to the extent that s/he is endowed with beautiful manners.

The first task of a person who believes in God
and His messengers is to rectify his conduct.

If a person has bad morals, it is no use even
if he has all the knowledge in the world and performs countless acts of
“worship.” He will always be refused by God and His Messenger. From beginning
to end, the Koran speaks to us of ethics and morality. The Messenger of God
himself has remarked: “Islam is beautiful moral conduct.” There can be no doubt
that a servant of God will attain the greatest stations and highest degrees in
Heaven as a consequence of his good moral conduct even if his worship is
deficient, whereas bad conduct will land him in the lowest circles of Hell even
if he was previously of God’s faithful servants. The Prophet of God states:
“Among you, the ones I love most and the ones closest to me on the Day of
Judgment are those with the best morals. I was sent to perfect morality.”

Quite obviously, then, lofty moral conduct is
the foundation of Islam. Just as there can be no building without a foundation,
there is no Islam without superior morals.

S/he who performs the Prayer, who fasts, and
yet persists in immoral behavior, cannot be said to have understood Islam.

Islam as a religion is based on the following
moral principles:

1

. You should perform your duties
only to please God. This principle is
one that will raise you ever higher, helping you to achieve perfection.

Your aim in life should never be to attain
happiness in this world, high stations in the next, or the wish to escape Hell.
Act only with the desire to please God. If you do this, you will have lived by
the greatest principle of Islam, and will attain the highest perfection. To
obtain the pleasure of God is the penultimate stage of man’s development. This
is a bliss that surpasses all else.

If you do something for the sake of obtaining
its reward, such as Heaven, you are engaging in a commercial transaction with
God: you give and you take. If you do something in order to avoid punishment,
such as Hell, you are merely looking out to save your own skin.

Now these are legitimate enough. Indeed, they
are what motivates most people to action. But from a truly Islamic point of view,
they are not the highest expression of morality.

In Islamic terms, the noblest conduct would be
to do something out of pure love for God, untainted by motives of
self-aggrandizement, self-promotion or self-protection—only to please Him
alone, because such is His command or prohibition, i.e. the way in which He
desires us to act or not to act.

The pleasure of God is greater than anything
else. This is precisely the “great salvation” or “great liberation” mentioned
in the Koran (5:119).

One has, therefore, to achieve this happiness
in this world. For this world is a world of training. Those who follow this
road will have found the greatest bliss.

You may say: “How can one obtain the pleasure
of God, and does he know if his Lord is pleased with him?” A student like you
once asked his teacher the same question: “Master,” he said, “can a servant
know that God is pleased with him?” His teacher told him that God’s pleasure is
hidden, and that a servant cannot know whether God is pleased with him or not.
The student, however, claimed that such knowledge is possible. When his teacher
asked how, he replied: “When the servant is pleased with his Lord, his Lord is
pleased with him,” and recited the Koranic verse: “Return to your Lord, pleased
and well-pleasing” (89:28). The teacher confirmed this was indeed the case, and
congratulated him.

As you can see, Kim, if the servant is pleased
with whatever issues from his Lord, God will in turn be pleased with him.

The Messenger of God has prayed for such
people, and said: “God bless those who know their selves, protect their
tongues, give thanks to God’s bounties and are pleased with God’s decrees.”
Thus, he who submits wholeheartedly to God’s will is exalted above others. That
is why when a famous mystic was asked: “Who is pleased with God?” He answered:
“One who doesn’t swerve left when he discovers that God has placed Hell on his
right.” Similarly, when another famous mystic was questioned: “When is a
servant pleased with his Lord?” she replied: “When he is pleased in calamity
just as he is pleased in bounty, and without his conduct wavering.”

In this manner, Kim, if His servant is pleased
with God, God will be pleased with him.

He who aims at God’s pleasure will also do
works that are sincere. Those who act in this way with no other concern are
saints, the friends of God. They have found their Lord’s pleasure and attained
the “great liberation.”

2

. Kim my child, the second principle you need
in order to achieve perfection concerns your intent. If your intentions are noble, you are an elevated person. A man, then, is what he
intends. If your intention is God, you belong to the People of God. For
this reason, the worship of the People of God is valuable in God’s sight, even
if it may be lacking, and its degree is above all others. That is why the
Prophet advised one of his Companions: “Make your religion sincere. Even if it
is not much, it will be enough for you.”

Note, Kim, how your heart responds to this
advice of the Messenger. Try to increase that response. You will see that your
deed performed with sincerity is like gold amongst base metals: it is worth
many works. Your deed, therefore, is nothing but your intent. This is why the
Prophet has explained: “Whatever your intent is, that is what you will receive.
If a person’s intent during Pilgrimage is not God and His Prophet but material
wealth or finding a wife, this is what his Pilgrimage will amount to.”

So perform your actions sincerely, and don’t
forget the Prophetic Tradition: “Human beings, do your deeds sincerely, for
God’s sake only. For God does not accept any works except those done with
sincerity for His sake.” If your intention is sincere, but you are unable to
perform the deed, God will reward you just as if you had been able to. Which is
why the Messenger of God said: “The intention of the believer is better than
his deed.”

Hence, even if your works are meager, elevate
and exalt your intention. This, in turn, will elevate you, and God will reward
you in accordance with your intent. The following anecdote illustrates this
well: During one of his battles, some of the Prophet’s Companions were not able
to accompany him. Of them, the Prophet remarked: “We have left behind a number
who could not join us. Yet they have shared in our reward.” “How so?” his
Companions asked. He replied: “Fate imprisoned them, yet they joined us with
their good intentions.”

I am sure, Kim, that this strikes a chord in
your heart. The mature believer reaches with his intentions where he cannot
reach with his deeds, and this constitutes the pinnacle of morality. These are
the fruits of the intentions of the good Moslem who nurtures them in his heart.

3

. The third
principle of superior moral behavior is what has been perennially known as the Golden Rule: Do as you would be done by.
In other words, do unto others as you would that others do unto you. Desire for
others what you desire for yourself, and do not desire for others what you
don’t desire for yourself. Thought and action commensurate with this principle
is enough to elevate you to the heights of superior moral conduct.

4

. The fourth principle is known
as the Happy Medium or the Golden Mean:
Avoid excess, even in the observance of this principle! “The middle of all
things,” Islam tells us, “is the best.” Indeed, wise people in all ages and
continents have sought the temperate zone of morality: enough of everything,
neither too much nor too little. The good is midway between extremes: ratio, a
sense of proportion, due measure. Yet, although balance is good in the long
run, sometimes it must be weighted down in favor of one side or the other.
There are emergency situations that demand not the optimum, but the maximum or
the minimum. There are times when even the Doctrine of the Mean may be pursued
intemperately, yet with due provision for exceptional circumstances,
moderation, my dear Kim, is the best of virtues in the long run.

As you can see, this list differs slightly. Not
that I approve of gorging, envy and indolence—quite the contrary! However,
whim, parsimony and scorn are of more importance.

Social life
presents us with many trials. We may be invaded by bad thoughts. One’s morality
is corrupted as each bad thought enters our hearts. Thus we become banished
from God’s presence, living through Hell. There are seven immoralities that
debase human beings, and to the extent that they avoid these, they are endowed
with high morals:

1. To follow one’s own caprice and mind: To
disobey God’s express orders is the first of these iniquities. Satan leads man
to his own destruction by making his acts appear pleasing to him. In order to
find happiness both in this world and the world to come, a person should leave
aside personal whims and caprice, and be guided by an enlightened principle in
all his acts.

2. Anger: Man can never rest, so long as he harbors anger. Sooner or
later, it explodes like a bomb. This is why it has been said: “He who subdues
his anger vanquishes his ego (self).” Similarly, the Messenger of God has
remarked: “Real wrestling is not to bring others to the ground, but to rein in
and control one’s self in times of anger.” And some saints have observed: “The
beginning of anger is insanity, and its end is bitter remorse.”

Nurse anger with calmness and
stay relaxed. As long as one remains in this world, one is tested by things
that arouse one’s temper. Try to be brave; this is such a test for us all! A
moment’s anger can destroy everything. If you can preserve your gentleness and
good nature in that instant, you may consider yourself one of the saved.

Gentleness is the custom of the
Folk of Heaven and leads one to happiness. It is achieved by putting the brakes
on the self when anger begins to manifest itself. Surely does God love such
good-natured people!

Anyone who contains his anger and
holds his tongue at such a time will be the greatest of men. The friends of God
call this “the fast of the tongue”: they have vowed not to say anything bad.
And our Prophet has said: “To fast is not to abstain from food and drink. It
can only be accomplished by staying away from bad things and bad words. If
someone harasses you with a bad word, do not reply in kind. Immediately remind
yourself: ‘I’m fasting, I’m fasting.’“

Kim, if you
take this advice of your father’s to heart, joy will be yours both here and in
the Hereafter. You can see how concerned the Prophet was for his Community, and
how much he wished for us to eschew evil. To learn these precepts, to act by
them, to receive and give guidance in every way, is the kind of conduct that is
pleasing to the Prophet of Islam.

3. Lust: Sex in its rightful place is not banned by Islam, but sexual
passion may draw one into evil of every kind: as long as sex is not legitimate,
happiness will not be ours.

The pages of
history are littered with people who have fallen victim to their passions,
which in turn was due to illicit sexual relationships. Anyone who wants to lead
a clean life should learn a lesson from this and stick to the legitimate.
Otherwise, it is inevitable that eternal misery will overwhelm us. The cure for
this is to build a family, and to relate to each other with religious ties.

4. Covetousness: Regarding with envy the property of others, not
desiring their happiness, is certainly a state we should distance ourselves
from.

As long as avarice
survives in man, he is like a predatory animal. In a short time, he loses that
which makes him human. To cure this should be one of your foremost tasks.

5. Parsimony. The miser is avid to accumulate property; he does not
wish to give to anyone. Being a miser is the essence of bad manners. Such a
person earns the contempt of God and people alike. Not without reason has the
Prophet said: “The stingy and the envious cannot enter Heaven.”

My advice to
you, Kim, is that you should always distance yourself from this, and give your
life for a friend if need be. You should be generous as the ocean. Give to the
needy; however, do not squander, and help those closest to you first, since we
have been instructed to do so in the Koran (16:90).

6. Disdain: Or contempt for others. Closely
associated with self-admiration, this is to belittle and despise others,
thinking them stupid, weak, or lowly, to scorn them for possessing
all-too-human attributes.

7. Pride: The greatest of sins. It is to be arrogant because of what
one has or is, which are really only what God has lent us and can reclaim at
any time. You should note, dear Kim, that these last two sins are closely
related, for feelings of superiority often go hand in hand with belief in the
inferiority of others.

Conceit is a sin that alienates us from others.
Every vain person is reproved, and belongs with the inmates of Hell. This is
why the Messenger of God has remarked: “The person with the slightest pride in
his heart cannot enter Heaven.”

Now, my dear Kim, if we can erase these vices
from ourselves, they will immediately be replaced by the virtues that are their
opposites, and it’s in this way that we gain maturity and perfection.

Caprice may be
replaced by obedience to God,

anger, by
gentleness,

lust by love
and friendship,

covetousness
by admiration,

parsimony by
generosity,

disdain by
self-criticism,

and pride by humility.

Thus do we become truly human, and truly begin
to understand Islam. A smile that is the sign of grace lightens one’s face.
This smile, which indicates contentment with whatever befalls one, is, after
faith, the second divine gift to us. This is precisely what the Prophet has
said: “A smiling countenance is God’s gift after faith.”

Because of love for our Creator, we are filled
with love and tolerance for His creatures as well. We greet and freely offer to
all. In short, we become the source of all approved morals, and as beautiful
and admirable as a rose.

Now such beautiful people, such
hearts of gold, are very rare indeed. There may be no more than a few in a
million. My dear Kim, it is my fondest hope that you too should become one of
them.

* * *

The following five virtues, Kim, serve also to
complete God’s grace upon you and invest you with perfection.

1. In lovingkindness be like the sun,

2. In bestowing life, be like water,

3. In humbleness, be like the earth,

4. In hiding shame, be like the night.

It is morality of the highest kind to have
compassion like the sun for all creatures because of their Creator; to give
life like water everywhere one flows, to be humble like earth under all
conditions, to cover and hide from sight all shames like the night, to remain
calm like the deceased (and not to react) whenever one is angry.

To know these principles and to practice them
is the highest stage attainable by man. A person will understand Islam and what
it means to be truly human only to the extent that he or she lives up to these
principles.

3. On Knowledge and Science

Dear Kim,

We are accustomed to thinking about science and
religion as mutually exclusive, as if the two could not coexist, let alone
supplement each other. Now this may be true for some religions, but it
certainly is not true for Islam. In no religion is science and knowledge more
highly valued than in Islam. If you look at the Koran and the Traditions of the
Prophet, you will find that the Arabic word ilm
(meaning knowledge/science), is invariably used in the most general sense,
without any qualifications. This shows us that knowledge of any kind is
regarded as valuable. The only distinction is between useful as opposed to
useless knowledge—as the Prophet prayed, “I take refuge in You from useless
knowledge.” The Koran states the difference between knowledge and ignorance
very simply: “He who knows and he who does not know—how can they be the same?”
(39:9). The ignorant and the knower are as different as night and day.

If Life is the first and greatest Attribute of
God (Hayy: “the Living”) in Islam,
Knowledge is no less than the second (Alim:
“the Omniscient”). To the extent that we learn and know, therefore, we are
participating in a divine attribute, and all divine attributes are wonderful.
We should be careful, my dear Kim—if one’s conceit rather than humility increases
with knowledge, then we are destined for disaster. One’s awe and wonder should
increase with knowledge, not one’s arrogance.

Many are the Prophet’s sayings in praise
of knowledge/science. Since the term “knowledge” is more inclusive and also
covers scientific knowledge, I shall drop the cumbersome double usage in what
follows, provided you never forget that science is also automatically implied.
Here are some examples:

“The ink of
the scholar or scientist is more valuable than the blood of the martyr.”

The list can be
expanded to include dozens of examples, Kim, and I’ve only cited the ones that
just popped into my mind. Here is another that will lead us on to other things:
“Who desires this world, let him learn knowledge. Who desires the other world,
let him learn knowledge. Who wants both this world and the next, let him learn
knowledge.”

Now combine this with two other Traditions:
“This world is the field you plant for the next. What you sow here, you shall
reap there.” And: “Do not neglect this world. You will be questioned on the
other side as to what you’ve done here.” If you reflect on these, you will
realize that you cannot afford to ignore
either world, and that you must learn
about both. A person possessing knowledge of only the physical (material)
world will be blind in one eye, while one who has knowledge of the nonphysical
(spiritual) world will be blind in the other. Ideally, one should possess
knowledge of both worlds; neither should be allowed to eclipse the other.

Knowledge of the physical world is abundantly
available in our day. In what follows, however, I shall concentrate more on the
essentials of useful knowledge not so readily at hand.

Knowledge, my dear Kim, is a guiding light that
informs us of the truth and makes human beings realize their humanity. Only in
this way can man rend the veil of ignorance and attain truth. Otherwise, he
leaves this world as blind as he was when he came into it. Knowledge is a light
that dissipates this blindness, that teaches the secrets and facts about this
entry into and exit from this world. It is due to the paramount importance of
this that God Almighty—in the first Koranic verse He revealed to our Messenger,
His Beloved—declared:

“Read: read in the name of your Lord” (96:1).

You can see from this, Kim, that reading and
learning is the very first injunction Islam enjoins upon us. For this reason,
the role of the teacher is also very exalted in Islam. Ali, the Prophet’s
nephew and the fourth Caliph, stated: “I am a slave to whoever teaches me a
word.” The following remark also belongs to him: “God did not bestow on His
servants anything more valuable than Intelligence.”

Know that Islam does not accept ignorance. We
must read and learn from the cradle to the grave. Whoever ceases to study falls
into error. He is engulfed by all kinds of base passions. That is why it is
necessary to read, and always to study.

If the nutrition of the body is food and drink,
the nourishment of the mind is knowledge and wisdom. Without knowledge, the
intellect is worthless. Know that the ignorant mind entangles one in evil. It
creates people who are dangerous to humanity.

Knowledge is a light that sharpens the
intellect and distinguishes good from ill. Only with knowledge is all manner of
worldly and otherworldly maturity attained. Knowledge is a grace that dwarfs
all others. When this boon is removed, everything tends to dissolution. That is
why the Prophet has remarked: “Learn knowledge. For whoever obtains it can
discriminate between good and evil, between truth and untruth. Knowledge lights
the road to Paradise. Knowledge is one’s companion in the deserts, one’s friend
in solitude, one’s closest friend when one is left all alone.”

If you ponder these wise words, you will
understand the value of knowledge and be enthusiastic to gain it. Hence the
Prophetic Tradition: “Dear Lord, make me wealthy with knowledge and decorate me
with gentleness. Exalt me with piety, and invest me with health.”

This is a lesson for us. Loqman, the
prophet-physician, told his son: “Listen to those who converse with men of
knowledge. God animates dead hearts with knowledge, just as He vivifies the
earth with rain.” And our Messenger adds: “Listening to one word from the
Knowledge of God is better than a year’s worship. To request knowledge is
mandatory for every believer. Be either a scientist, a student, or a lover of
knowledge. Don’t be a fourth thing, for you will be ruined.”

“God provides the livelihood of those who seek
knowledge for His sake from unexpected quarters. Almighty God opens the way of
Heaven for any believer who takes the path of knowledge.”

You see, Kim, the Messenger of God has always
invited his community to knowledge, and praised science and scholarship. The
rank of knowledge is the highest of ranks. Always make this rank your aim, and
always invigorate yourself with science. Remember the words of our Prophet:
“Those who devote their lives to knowledge never die.”

Read these words many times, think deeply, and
never be heedless of science. Take knowledge from whatever quarter you may find
it, in accordance with the saying of the Prophet: “Wisdom is the lost property
of the believer: s/he takes it wherever s/he finds it.” Take it from
non-Moslems, if that is where it is. Endure hardships for the sake of learning,
and study and work tirelessly. For this exalted station may demand great
efforts, lack of sleep, even your life. Let nothing stand in your way, so long
as you learn a word of knowledge. This is what will give you life. This is what
will make you a friend of God. But don’t learn knowledge to show it off, and
don’t sell it for worldly gains. If you do so, you will invariably be doomed.
Our Messenger informs us: “Who learns knowledge in order to be proud, God
throws him into Hell.”

My dear Kim, you should learn with the purpose
of pleasing God, and act accordingly. If you do so, you will surely belong to
God’s elect. Otherwise, your knowledge will complain against you on the Day of
Reckoning, and you will be of those shamed in God’s sight.

Respect people of knowledge, and be deferential
toward them. For they are very honorable people in the sight of God. Whoever
respects and defers to them is respecting and defering to God and His Prophet.
Ponder deeply the Prophet’s words: “Whoever respects scholars or scientists has
shown respect to me.” Do not forget that those who instill knowledge in you
have more rights over you than your parents. Never give them a stern or angry
glance. Never talk lightly with them; always be kind and courteous. Praise them
in their life and death, and do not forget them in your Prayers or
supplications. View them with gentleness and tenderness, remembering that they
are the ones who have taught you divine science. Even looking at them kindly is
worship in itself. In fact, the Prophet has said in a Tradition: “Viewing a man
of knowledge who lives by his knowledge is the equivalent of prayer.”

These words are reserved for those whose
actions fit their knowledge. These are the true heirs of the prophets; they are
stars that shine on earth. Following their path will lead you to happiness. It
is always necessary to exalt them. So says the Prophet of God: “Exalt the
people of knowledge in my community, and show them respect. For they are like
stars in this world. The virtue of a scientist whose conduct matches his
knowledge is as superior to the virtue of a worshiper as my virtue exceeds that
of my community.”

Having learned all these, it should be your
duty to take stock of yourself and study hard, devoting as much of your free
time as possible to the acquisition of knowledge.

If you ask: “What should I study?” my answer is
that before anything else, you should avoid Forbidden gain, ensure that every
morsel you and your family swallow is purchased with Allowed earnings, and be
patient; for these precede learning in priority.

Knowledge is a divine light that does not
penetrate breasts imbued with the Forbidden, and does not yield to uncouth and
discourteous persons. Consequently, if you desire knowledge you must work hard,
and apply what you already know. If you chance to meet a man of knowledge whose
mode of life is true to his knowledge, consider him a grace from God. If you
lose him, you will be lost. If you find a book of his, impress it upon your
heart. The words of such people are a Godsend.

There are two kinds of knowledge in general.
One kind belongs to the divine, the other to the mundane. Sciences of the
divine infuse you with life. To learn these is obligatory. As the Prophet said:
“It is incumbent on every Moslem man and woman to request knowledge.” Knowledge
of divine matters includes such things as the afterlife, Prayer, Fasting, the
Alms-tax, the Pilgrimage, and commercial dealings. Those who do not want to
learn these will regret it, and God will hold them accountable. To learn these
and teach them to our children is the duty of every Moslem.

The other kind is our knowledge of the external
world. This knowledge is necessary in order to survive as an individual and to
regulate social life. It is necessary to learn this as well. Because this kind
of knowledge is in continual progress, one must stay abreast of developments.
This is why Ali, the fourth Caliph, remarked: “Raise your children not
according to the requirements of your times, but of the times they will find
themselves in.”

In short, Kim, try to learn something as long as you are in this
world. If these two kinds of knowledge complement each other, you will be a
perfect man. You will lead a happy life, and won’t be put to shame in this
world or the next. Then will this sad face of your father be allowed a smile.

4. On Health and Free Time

Dear Kim,

The secret of success in this world and the
next is to protect your health, and to devote your free time to knowledge and
wisdom. He who appreciates the value of his health and free time will be
awarded accordingly.

These two gifts are such boons of the Almighty
that they posess vital importance in every respect, completing all other boons.

The West has succeeded in every field due to
its proper use of health and free time, which the Prophet of God pointed out
1400 years ago. He said: “There are two gifts about which many people are
confused. These are health and free time.”

Many people are ignorant of God’s gift of free
time. They always squander this gift on useless things and delude themselves.
They waste their valuable life, falling short in both this world and the next.

Therefore, Kim, it is not only necesary but
mandatory to recognize the value of these gifts, and to use them wisely. That’s
why the saints have observed: “He who honors his hour wins his day, and he who
honors his day wins his life.” All the gains of civilization can be traced to
the observance of this fact, and all individual and social calamities to the
failure to do so.

The first thing to do is to learn the science
of health and of the body. This is why the great scholar Ghazzali said: “There
are two kinds of sciences to be learned: the sciences of the body [physical
sciences] and the sciences of religion.”

The first of the corporeal sciences is the
science of nutrition. Concerning this, the Prophet remarked: “The stomach is
the home of illness; diet is the beginning of all cures.”

To fill the stomach is nothing to be proud of.
The thing to do is to eat food that is good for health in proportion to one’s
appetite. True human beings don’t eat unless overcome by hunger, or drink
unless thirsty. They rise from the table before they’re full. They aren’t fazed
by the world’s commotion; they leave things to God and are at peace in their
hearts.

My dear Kim, you should be prepared to see much
sorrow and pain in this world. This is an unavoidable trial for us all. You
must, however, trust in God, just as His Prophet did. Don’t mind the gossip of
the ordinary. Such things will only confuse you. Always cleave to hope, and be
cheerful. Leave the truth to God, stick with the truth, and thus remain in
comfort.

Enjoy strolls in fresh air, and wake up at
daybreak. Such action will elevate you both physically and spiritually.
Enjoying the expanse of blue seas, lofty mountains, and meditating in their
presence, constitute the most beautiful hours of a lifetime.

The greatest influence on your corporeal and
spiritual life will be your friends. Be very careful about them. Always talk
with them in cognizance of the fact that today’s friend may be tomorrow’s
enemy. It will be better for you if you keep your secrets to yourself. But you
must help all your friends. Steer clear of hypocrites—they always spell danger
for anyone who comes within their sphere.

Someone once asked a master: “How should I
speak with people?” He replied: “My son, have you ever walked barefoot in a field
of thorns?” “Yes.” “And how did you walk?” “With great care.” “Precisely. So
talk with great care when you talk to people.”

Be temperate in your conversations with others.
Don’t reveal your every secret and business. The one you address could
conceivably become estranged from you some day, and the friend might be
replaced by an enemy. Nor should you be inimical towards someone estranged from
you, for the day may come when he will become a friend, and then you will be
ashamed every time you look at him. In short, to abide by moderation in
everything is the essence of safety and happiness.

Keep these Traditions in mind, so that you
won’t stray and surrender yourself to trouble or jeopardize your physical and
mental health. These are all factors that will lead you to happiness.

My advice is that you should determine the
times when you will work, sleep, eat and rest, not wasting one moment. The
Prophet’s life was always well-ordered; he planned his times of worship, work
and rest. This is the secret of success, and this is why those in the West have
made this their principle and organized their time.

Once you understand these points, what remains
is to apply them. They are a key to maturity and perfection. Always keep this
key in hand, and tread this path. Nothing but every happiness and success will
be yours if you do so.

5. Concerning Family Duties

My Dear Kim,

The family is the smallest unit of society;
therefore, family life should bevalued and strengthened. Social life is only as
strong as family life is morally clean, informed, and wise. The heads of the
family are the teachers and judges of this little community. It is their
responsibility to endow their children with knowledge and to resolve their
differences.

Every child is entrusted by God to its parents.
And anyone who violates this trust will be held responsible by God.

Therefore, Kim, it is a religious obligation on
every parent to give a child a good name, to teach it the religion, and to show
it the beautiful places of this world.

The Lord proclaims in the Koran: “Enjoin Prayer
on your people, and remain steadfast in Prayer” (20:132).

If we consider this verse in depth, it becomes
clear that it is incumbent on every Moslem family to enjoin Prayer on its
members. That is why, after this verse was revealed, the Prophet would visit
Ali, his, son-in-law, at daybreak, and call out: “Prayer is better than sleep,”
inviting him to Morning Prayer.

Prayer is a form of worship that combines all
other forms, and preserves the one who performs it from all evils. If a person
performs Prayer with a mature peacefulness, he will become a saintly person and
will exhibit all kinds of superior moral conduct. As for bad-tempered persons
who derive no benefit from their Prayers, they are like people who shuffle
along rather than walk, since their Prayer is based on rote imitation without
any appreciation of its subtler aspects. But if a person starts his Prayer with
the love of God in his heart and with the desire to please Him, he will leave
behind his bad habits with the first mention of: “God Most Great,” and his bad
habits will be purged from him by the end of his Prayer.

Such peaceful Prayer greatly elevates a person.
It makes him loveable in the sight of God and His creatures. This is why Prayer
is the pillar of the Islamic religion. Indeed, the Prophet has said: “Prayer is
the pillar of religion. Whoever performs it has built up his religion, and
whoever doesn’t has wrecked his religion.”

Just as everything has a foundation, a main
pillar, the basis of this religion is Prayer. The building will be as strong as
this pillar is. Within the little community of a family, legal relationships
will take place with justice, and happiness will manifest itself. The heads of
the family, therefore, are like shepherds responsible for the conduct of their
flock. The Prophet has explained: “Each one of you is a shepherd with respect
to his duties. A ruler is a shepherd over those he rules. He is responsible for
the dissemination of justice in his country. A person is responsible for his
people and family, and is a shepherd to them. A woman is a shepherd in her
home, and is responsible for everything within it. A servant is responsible for
the property of those s/he serves, and for protecting it. Be aware that you are
all shepherds, and are responsible for the duties you undertake.”

If you ponder this saying, everyone is
responsible for those entrusted to him. A family that accepts the Lord’s
commandments is a beautiful family and a felicitous home. This, Kim, has always
been my aim as well. I am happy when I see you all on this path, and my heart
is filled with light.

It is better to seek one’s livelihood without
anxiety. The Lord has declared: “Ask for sustenance, and We will sustain you.
The happy ending is for those who take care” (20:132).

The true Sustainer, Kim, is God. We should
continue our Prayers and worship with the hope that sustenance will be
provided. But the Lord also says: “There is nothing for man but the work of his
own hands” (53:39). For sustenance, we should “invoke its causes;” i.e., we
should seek out ways to earn it. For this is the Divine Way. If you don’t sow,
neither will you reap.

God has created a cause for everything. And it
is the duty of breadwinners to open a door of livelihood for their children. In
this case, they are the sustainers.

We ask God to fulfil our desires along with
everything else. He who forgets God and asks from His creatures will become an
associator. God’s servants are simply conduits or means. The one who gives
sustenance is God. Work, too, is a means. As the Prophet has said: “The doors
of sustenance are locked. Work and effort are their keys.”

Just as this family head invites you to the
fullest realization of your religion, Kim, so do I also invite you to work and
effort in worldly matters. You will be given the key of some craft to open the
doors of sustenance. If I fail in this, I will be held accountable.

And so, to provide guidance that leads to the
good things in this life and the next is one of the duties of the heads of the
family. Happy results await such people of God who fear Him, fulfill their
obligations such as Prayer and fasting, and sacrifice neither this world for
the next, nor vice versa. Such people are never separated from the invocation
of God, under any conditions and in any transaction. They are the leaders of
those who take care, and happiness is their lot.

Concerning them, the Prophet has prayed: “May
God have mercy on the father who gives help in a good cause,” and concerning
the training of children, has said: “Train your children so that they will have
three traits: love for the Prophet of God, for the Prophets, and for the
families of the Prophets.”

6. On the Rights of Parents

Dear Kim,

Every human being has duties towards his Lord
and His creatures. The duties owed the Lord are called “the rights of God,” and
the duties owed to His creatures are called “the rights of His servants.” First
and foremost among the latter are the rights of parents.

The rights belonging to God are acknowledgement
of His Oneness, i.e. not associating anything with Him, and worship and
obedience. And the rights belonging to His servants, beginning with obedience
and service to one’s father and mother, are: remembering one’s relatives,
visiting and giving to them; treating widows, orphans, the poor, and neighbors
with good cheer, doing them favors of all kinds, greeting them, visiting them
if they are ill, being present at their funerals, responding to their
invitations, advising them if they seek advice, saying “God bless you” if they
sneeze, and so on. Such are the rights of one servant of God over another.

For this reason, the Prophet has said: “Whoever
believes in God’s Prophet should do good to one’s neighbor, whoever believes in
God and the Last Day should be bounteous to one’s visitors, and should either
speak well or hold his silence. Whenever Gabriel came to me, he would counsel
respect for neighbors’ rights. Gabriel emphasized this so much, I thought that
presently neighbors would even be heirs to each other.” Such rights are
obligatory on each and every Moslem.

There are three verses in the Koran that cover
two decrees which are, in each case, inseparable. One of these is: “Do the
Prayer, pay the Alms-tax” (2:43). It is said that whoever performs his Prayer
but does not pay the Alms-tax will find that God won’t accept his Prayers.

The second is: “Obey the Prophet of God”
(4:59). If a person knows and obeys his Lord but does not obey the Prophet, God
will not accept his obedience.

The third is: “Human being, give thanks to Me
and to your parents” (31:14). If a person gives thanks to God but not to his
father and mother, it is as if he hadn’t given thanks to God.

In this last verse, the Almighty declares: “We
have advised man to do good to his parents. For his mother carried him in her
belly with weakness upon weakness. She suckled him for two years, and then
ended it. For this reason We have counseled service to his parents, and have
told him: ‘Human being, give thanks to Me, and to your father and mother. In
the afterlife, you will only come to My presence. There is nowhere else to go.
I shall then question you concerning whether you gave thanks to Me and to your
parents.’“

This verse says it all. You should appreciate
how great the rights of your parents are. Because the rights of the mother are
superior to those of the father, God says: “she carried him with weakness upon
weakness.” When a person was in his mother’s belly, she suffered great
difficulty and pain. As the child grew in the womb, her “weakness upon
weakness” increased. This weakness and tribulation increased every day until
birth. After it was born, the mother continued to nurture and raise her child,
frequently sacrificing her sleep. She suckled it for up to two years, and
afterwards continued to “lower her wings of mercy” over it, protecting it against
all kinds of evil. She trembled every hour for that child up to the time of its
adolescence.

After puberty, a child becomes an accountable
human being. It is then that God’s decree applies: “We advised you to serve
your parents. Human being, give thanks to Me and to your parents.”

Give thanks first to God, who created man and
endowed him with all manner of gifts. Next, give thanks to the service of your
mother and father, who trembled over you day and night, fed you and raised you,
and withstood all kinds of hardships. If you do not recognize this great
service, you will be accountable to the Lord when you find yourself in the
Divine Presence tomorrow.

Kim, I ask you to ponder this over and over
again. Whoever does not recognize his parents and rebels against them has not
understood the meaning of Islam and of being human.

A Companion once asked the Prophet: “What is
the greatest of good works?” He answered: “Performing an obligatory Prayer in
its due time.” “And after that?” “Obedience and doing good to one’s parents.”
“And then?” “Struggle in the way of God.”

This Tradition shows us that obedience to one’s
father and mother takes precedence over struggle for God’s sake. The Almighty
also bound earlier religious communities with a covenant to honor one’s father
and mother. This covenant testifies to the greatness of this issue. The Lord
says: “We bound the Children of Israel with a covenant to worship none other
than God, and to obey and be kind to their parents” (2:83).

Because the labor and service of the mother are
greater than those of the father, the mother’s rights are greater than the
father’s. Hence, one day a man came to the Prophet of God, and said: “Who is
most worthy of my respect and protection?” The Prophet replied: “Your mother.”
“And after that?” “Again, your mother.” “And next?” “Once again, your mother.”
“And then?” “Your father.”

The threefold repetition of the mother in this
Tradition indicates the rights of a mother over her child, and that protection
of and service to her should be correspondingly great. But the father’s rights
are great, too. And so, in Islam, it is incumbent on us to respect and be kind
to: first, the mother, next, the father, and then relatives and neighbors.

If these considerations lead you to the
question: “How should I behave towards my parents?” God replies: “Never speak
sternly with them, never scold them or break their hearts with unkind words or
exclamations” (17:23). Even the slightest negative exclamation is prohibited,
let alone shouting at them or turning away from them.

He who pleases his mother and father pleases
God. God, my dear Kim, has said: “If they suggest something to you, don’t
refuse it because you find it difficult, and speak kindly to them, favor them
with sweet words. Lower your wings of lovingkindness and compassion on them and
act accordingly, and say: ‘My Lord, have compassion for them’“ (17:24).

Since the rights of your parents are so
important, Kim, even the slightest expression of displeasure in carrying out
their chores will make you a rebel against God. It is your duty always to smile
at them, speak sweetly to them, always to show tenderness and mercy, to pray to
God for them, always to recall them with a prayer of mercy if they are dead, to
rise when they come in, and to look after them in their old age or weakness.

One day a young man came to the Prophet and
complained about his father: “My father makes use of my property as he wishes.
Please tell him not to transgress my property.” So the Prophet invited the
father to come over. When the man came, he burst into tears: “Once, my son was
weak and I was strong, he was poor and I was rich. I never begrudged him any of
my food. Now I am old and he is rich, and my child forbids me his property.”
And he wept. The Prophet of God and those present wept with him. The Prophet
turned to the young man and said: “Both you and your property belong to your
father.”

As the Prophet has said: “Paradise lies under
the feet of mothers.” In other words, those who obey God and His Prophet and
please their mothers will go to Heaven. The prayers of parents dissipate veils;
God accepts those prayers. With the aid of that prayer, God makes a servant
honored and elevates him. My child, I pray to God that you may be sincere.
Hearing these words, may you be obedient to God, His Prophet, your mother, and
me. If you do this, all manner of happiness will be ours.

These words are but a drop in the ocean, but
heed them throughout your life. They are a light that will guide you to safety.
Those who follow this path achieve happiness.

7. Three Commandments, Three Prohibitions

Dear Kim,

I want to draw your attention to three things
that are the source of beauteous conduct, and another three that give rise to
outrageous behavior. To know them and act by them will enrich your life,
leading you to maturity and perfection.

The Almighty declares in the Koran: “God calls
you to justice, performing good acts, and giving to relatives in need. He
forbids fornication, impropriety, and insolence. He advises you with
commandments and prohibitions, so that you may take heed” (16:90).

This verse gives valuable advice in a nutshell.
For this reason, it is also called “the Pole of the Koran.”

If all the world were to abide by it, all
immorality and oppression would cease. This is why the Prophet made it a
permanent part of the Friday Sermon, so that Moslems may contemplate it and be
conscious. Unfortunately, however, few people realize its importance.

Let us try to fathom the depths of meaning this
verse contains.

Three things are enjoined in this verse that
are the fount of all praiseworthy morals. By obeying them, a person unites all
salutary conduct in himself. And God forbids three other things with this verse
that, if societies were to heed them, the door would be opened to all kinds of
progress. Hence, the verse is of vital importance to humanity. All moral
behavior is summarized in it.

First of all, God commands justice. For justice is the basis of everything, and nothing can
survive without it.

Justice is a condition of the spirit, and
implies giving rights where they are due. This is a social matter. If everyone
acts with justice, society will gain new life. Swerving from justice leads to
agony in both the individual and social spheres.

Justice is to be distant from the extremes of
too much or too little, and to live in moderation along the right path.
According to Ghazzali, justice is served by performing what is necessary.

Good acts
are those that are useful to human beings beyond the requirements of necessity.
With this verse, God enjoins us to do good to everyone.

Good-doing has a primary place in Islam. God
loves those who do good. That is why our ancestors built libraries, schools,
fountains, bridges, etc. without regard to material returns. In Islam, doing
good is a quality superior to basic justice. Justice is the first step in human
morality. Doing good is the virtuous deeds that people perform out of their own
volition.

God especially enjoins doing good and giving to relatives who are in need. Of
course, blood relations take precedence over others. Indeed, the Prophet has
said: “What is given to the poor is charity. The charity given to relatives and
kin is double charity. Its merit is twofold.”

As you can see, Kim, there is a style to doing
good. In enjoining the good, the Koran starts with the first level of good, and
outlines all the levels.

On the other hand, God forbids three forms of
evil. The first of these is fornication.
This is to satisfy one’s lust by illicit means. Fornication is a deadly
indecency in social life. God has prohibited it.

He has also prohibited impropriety. This results from the power of anger in man.
Everything that is forbidden by Holy Law falls under impropriety. Due to anger,
man transgresses all limits set by God and begins to do what has been
prohibited to him. Lying, gossiping and jealousy are examples of improper
things.

As for insolence,
this arises from the power of misconception in man. It drives one to vanity,
conceit, and oppression. The whole of society is influenced by insolence, and
it is one of the worst evils.

Just as in the case of virtues, God outlines
all the levels of evil and shows them to us from the first to the last. He
forbids us to engage with evil at any level: He wants us to practice all kinds
of good, and to refrain from all kinds of evil.

8. Control Your Self, Know Yourself

My Dear Kim,

Whoever controls his self will know himself, will
understand God’s purpose in bringing us forth into this world, and will be one
of those who attain divine knowledge.

The most wonderfully perfect human beings are
those who are able to control themselves. The ego is a faculty in man that
commands him to do bad things. It manifests itself in different ways in each
human being. It does not die, and can only be contained. It lives in man and it
dies with him.

Struggling against the ego will make you
perfect. The thing to do is to maintain your chastity at the point your ego
becomes manifest. Losing your purity and good cheer is a sure sign that you
have been overcome by your ego.

Always protect your purity and high spirits.
This is the door to happiness—do not close it. Be patient, and victory will be
yours.

Moses once complained to God: “My Lord, my
people are gossiping about me, ascribing attributes to me that I don’t possess.
Please stop them.” The Lord answered: “Moses, they gossip about Me concerning
attributes I don’t have even though I am their Creator. But I am patient with
them. You, too, should be patient.”

A great Sufi master has said: “We have tried
every means, and have not been able to find anything better than patience.
Patience and precaution are the remedies for everything.”

Everyone has understood and practiced patience
in a different way, but let me explain it to you in a couple of words:

Patience is containment of the ego. That is, it
means to lock up egotistic drives in order to reach a certain goal, and to
withstand all difficulties in this way.

Barring very few exceptions, we are all
prisoners of our egos. The choice is clear: either we imprison the ego, or it
imprisons us.

Life is an endless struggle. One must always be
cool-headed in this struggle, and must imprison the ego and persevere. Such
level-headed warriors are always successful. And maturity, or perfection,
develops in a person in proportion to this struggle.

Struggle against the bad drives that lead one
to evil is struggle of the highest order. Indeed, on returning from a battle,
the Prophet of God commented: “We are now going from the lesser battle to the
greatest one.” “And what is that?” he was asked. He replied: “The battle
against the self.”

As you can see, Kim, the Prophet considered war
against the faithless the lesser and struggle against the self the greater,
indeed the greatest, battle. He who is victorious in this battle will
definitely be a great man. Paradise will long for him. God has announced in His
Book: “Whoever keeps his self from caprice, fearing the station of his Lord, to
him belongs the place and station of Paradise.”

This verse tells you everything. If you fear
your Lord and do not pursue the desires and predilections of your ego, there
will be no fear and sorrow for you. If you want to be a saint, once you conquer
your self, your location will be Paradise. The Prophet has also said: “The
beginning of all knowledge is knowledge of the self,” and: “He who knows his
self knows his Lord.”

Hearing all this, you may well ask: “Just how
am I supposed to know my self?”

All men of knowledge and all saints have
struggled to know their selves. Although the goal is the same, many are the
roads that lead to it. They can, however, be divided into paths of the spirit
and paths of the flesh.

The paths of the flesh are fasting often,
worshiping day and night, denying the self its desires and even its
suggestions, and accustoming it to difficulties.

The ways of the spirit are obedience to God
alone, and remaining aloof from His creatures.

As a father who has tried everything in this
respect, I suggest that you should find the middle way between these two roads.
Read the Prophet’s book of high morals and act accordingly. The life of the
Prophet, which was a guide to the worlds, is enough to rejuvenate anyone. Love
the great Prophet of God. I, in turn, love you in proportion to your love for
him.

Let me tell you a true story that will help you
along this road:

There was once a mystic who was in love with
God from his very childhood. Inspired by the example of his uncle, who was
given to great acts of worship, he too began to stay awake at nights and push
himself to his limits, and his health was impaired as a result. One day his
uncle told him: “When you’re sleepy, go to bed. Eat, drink, but always say to
yourself: ‘God sees me, He knows my situation, whatever I do, I do in His
presence,’ and act accordingly.”

Thanks to this advice, the little child in time
became a great man. He is known as Tustari among the great saints.

The Folk of God call this state permanent presence or permanent Prayer, where the heart is
always with God. This has been referred to in various ways: “their eyes on the
steed, their hearts with the Beloved,” or “Their ears with the sound, their
Hearts with the Lord,” or “their body among creatures, their heart with the
Creator.”

Such people are with God at heart, and have
escaped from the realm of creatures. They have banned the gossip of people from
their hearts.

“Their hands are at work, their hearts at
play;” “their feet are on the road, their hearts upon invocation;” “their
bodies on the mattress, their hearts with the Friend.”

They have always preserved their purity of
heart, and have achieved infinite bliss. Because this is the Way of the
Prophet, whoever practices it will subdue his self, and attain Paradise and the
Vision of God. Indeed, the Prophet told one of his beloved friends: “If you
know that you have only a day and a night left to live, and yet the love of
offspring and the world is not in your heart, continue in this manner, for this
is my Way. Whoever abides by my Way abides by me, and is with me in Heaven.”

Always keep this golden advice in mind. For it
is a life-saver. If your heart is free from the world and its hatreds and
illusions, you will be at peace no matter where you are. Otherwise, delusions
and vain imaginings will engulf you, and you will be of the hapless.

There are people—hypochondriacs—who drive
themselves sick through baseless thoughts and imaginings. This is a deadly
disease of the ego, and kills a person both in body and in spirit. If you don’t
keep yourself distant from such feelings, you will always be ill. The cure for
this is to trust in God, to learn from past experience, and to try to set one’s
business in order. This will invigorate you, make you the master of your ego, and
let you know yourself.

Therefore, Kim, if you are unloved, try to
rectify yourself. The really great task is to control one’s self and bear every
situation patiently. The true masters are those who achieve this. They do not mess
with the chaos and strife of this world. This is why one of them has said: “Be
an ocean, and you won’t be tainted.” Know that your self is a boundless ocean.

The Lord has declared: “Say ‘God’ [let your
enthusiasm and happiness be God], then leave the faithless in their error”
(6:92). You too, my child, should reside with Truth, and leave creation to its
Creator. Do not be overwhelmed by the stress of hardships that people impose on
you. If you do so, your self will be your slave, and you will belong to those
who find happiness in this world and the next.

9. On Decisiveness, Work, and Perseverance

Dear Kim,

Three factors that influence success in this
world and the next are decisiveness, industry, and perseverance. These three
complement and complete each other.

An indecisive and cowardly person is like a
ship without a rudder. He cannot progress in any respect. Indecision is born of
cowardice, and this is the beginning of failure. Success begins with
decisiveness.

The indecisive and cowardly person will fall
behind everyone. In your life, before anything else, think, decide, and then
work for it. This is the principle that is applied in the world of science. To
fear decision is the worst thing; it can even jeopardize one’s life. Thinking
for days in order to reach a decision can have the same effect: it can lead to
indecision. In order to decide, it is better to think well first, say “yea,”
and then start work immediately.

In both religious and worldly matters, you can
find people who have fallen into bewilderment, failure and despair because of
indecision.

Firm decision will save you. If cowardly and
brooding friends then try to detain you, separate from them. Make friends with
boldhearted, decisive people in your life. They are the ones who will succeed sooner
or later. The Prophet is our best guide in this matter. Once he decided on a
course, who was there to detain him from it? True human beings have always been
like this.

A weak decision is doomed to dissolution.
Decision is the fruit of belief. Your decision will be strong to the extent
that you have faith.

After a decision is made, enthusiasm for work
will lead you to success. Islam does not accept sloth. God loves His servants
who are active, enterprising and hardworking. A person’s earnings are commensurate
with his knowledge and his labor. God declares in the Koran: “There is nothing
for man other than the work of his own hands” (53:39).

As you sow, so shall you reap; and if you don’t
sow, neither shall you reap. Nor can you sow barley and reap wheat in its
place. Your crop will be in accordance with your industry, knowledge, and care.
As I have told you before, the Prophet has said: “The doors of sustenance are
closed. Work and struggle are the keys that will open them.” This tells you
all. Just as God has appointed a cause for everything, so has He appointed a
cause for receiving sustenance. Trust comes only after work and toil. A person
must sow first. Only afterwards can he trust in God for the results. A true
Moslem, therefore, will struggle both physically and spiritually. God loves
those who work hard. The Prophet has said: “Those who gain are the friends of
God,” and here “those who gain” means people who work hard materially and
spiritually to gain God’s pleasure. These are very noble people.

Therefore, Kim, it is also my desire to see you
hard at work on whatever decision you reach. The Prophet himself loved to work,
whether at home or outdoors.

The beginning of everything is study, the
middle is work, and the end is virtue. Hence, abide by this till your last
breath. This is a great lesson for you.

A person does not live for himself alone. He
also lives for other human beings. One must, therefore, toil to leave behind a
worthy gift to those who survive. Let me tell you a nice story in this context.

The great Caliph Haroon Rasheed one day came
upon a man who was planting saplings. He said : “You’re very old. You’ll never
see this tree you’re planting bear fruit. So don’t sweat so much, and save
yourself the trouble.”

In reply, the man said: “Your
Majesty, those before us planted trees, and we ate their fruit. Now it’s our
turn to plant trees, so that those who come after us may eat ours.”

The Caliph was very pleased with
this answer, and gave him a bag of gold. Whereupon the man said: “You see, Your
Majesty? I’ve reaped the fruits of my efforts already.”

This is the way real human beings work. In the
field of knowledge, we have eaten the fruit of those who preceded us. We, in
turn, should blaze good trails for our successors. If you carry this over to
the fields of commerce and industry, all the achievements you see about you are
the result of this notion.

Learning is easy. So is work. But the really
important thing is to see it through to its end. And for this, perseverance is
required.

This is the most difficult thing. If you are
surrounded by a sea of hardships, and even if your life is in danger, you must
persevere in the right path. Perseverance leads to success; it is the only way
to overcome difficulties.

He who abides by these principles will succeed
only to the extent that he does so. That is why great people have said:
“Whoever perseveres will achieve victory.” He who perseveres will overcome
danger and reap his crop.

Even a seed planted in the soil will not sprout
if it isn’t allowed to stay there. If you then try to remove it, you will have
failed in your task.

As long as you are decisive, hardworking and
perseverant, you will be victorious, with God’s help, in anything you set
yourself to. This is what all great men have done, and this is how they
succeeded in their tasks.

10. Concerning Advice

My Dear Kim,

Advice is the balm of the heart. Just as rain
rejuvenates parched soil, advice enlivens dead hearts. True advice is like the
Elixir of Life; he who drinks of it will never die.

Religion itself is advice. He who listens,
believes and acts will be cured. Indeed, the Prophet himself said: “Religion is
advice, religion is advice, religion is advice.”

The purpose of advice is to enlighten human
beings, and to tell them the ways that are good for this world and the next.
Advice consists of words that soften the hearts of listeners and guide them
rightly. As one listens to such valuable advice, one’s ideas are changed, and
one feels a serenity. To find such a person and to heed his life-giving
advice—here is your salvation. It is better to find such a person than to find
all the treasures of the world. In the presence of such people, all your bad
habits, worries and pains will melt away like snow in the sun. Their words
enliven hearts just as rain invigorates dry earth.

It is better to listen to the advice of such
people for an hour than to read a thousand books and to live a thousand
experiences. These people, though, have first of all preached to themselves and
rejuvenated themselves. Such rejuvenation is possible only by preaching to the
self. This is why the Prophet said: “First preach to your self, then to other
people.” In His Book, God has admonished those who don’t practice what they
preach with the words: “Why don’t you do as you say?”

As you can see, in order to advise, it is
necessary first to know, and then to act in accordance with this. That is why
he who knows but does not act upon his knowledge has no value either with God
or with people. Men of knowledge worthy of being heeded are only men of action
who are the inheritors of the Prophets. These are persons who fear God and who
base their words on the sayings of the Prophet. God has declared in His Book
concerning them: “Men of knowledge are only those who fear God” (35:28). Man
fears God to the extent that he knows his Lord and believes in His Word (the
Koran). Hence, those who lack action are those who have no fear of God.

Therefore, Kim, the man of knowledge whose
guidance you seek must be Godfearing. Otherwise, more harm will come from him
than good. The person you heed must be both a knower and a doer. He must act in
accordance with the command of the Prophet, and thus of the Lord. To obey them
is the same thing as obeying the descendants of the Prophets. God has declared
in His Book: “Obey the Prophet, and obey those in authority” (4:59). These
people have the authority to speak, and it is necessary to listen to the
knowledge and truth that issues from their mouths. For they are the heirs of
the Prophets. As the Tradition states: “Men of knowledge are the inheritors of
the Prophets.” And the happiness of the world is dependent on the existence of
such people. As the Prophet has stated in another Tradition: “The world stands
with the justice of rulers, the knowledge of scientists and scholars, the
generosity of the rich, and the prayers of the poor.”

The person who gives advice should be dressed
in the morality of the Prophet, and should always think of the good of society,
apart from all ills and personal considerations. He is always careful to speak
well. He scrupulously avoids boorish speech that will break hearts and induce
revulsion. It is necessary always to give advice gently and in a friendly way.
A caliph once chided a person who was advising him vehemently: “Give advice
gently and softly. When God sent a person better than you (namely, Moses) to a
person worse than me (Pharaoh), He told him to address that man with sweetness
and gentleness.”

As you can see, Kim, a person who gives advice
must do so very gently and softly, using kind and appealing words. When
criticizing a community for bad conduct, it is better to say “we are like this”
rather than “you are that way.”

This kind of speech will not arouse the ire of
people who have become slaves to their egos. Another point to be borne in mind
when giving advice is to understand the troubles of people and to administer
the proper medicine, to speak according to their comprehension. The Prophet has
told us to speak with people in accordance with their capacity to understand.
To tell the truth with spirited words, to enlighten with appealing examples, to
be humble and cheerful, are qualities required of those who give advice.

No matter how much you may know, do not shun
listening to your loved ones and showing an interest in them. To take an
interest in the person you are speaking with strengthens the ties of affection.
Contrariwise, refusing to listen to them or to be interested in them is the
worst form of conduct. These are things that estrange and deaden a man of
advice, and are not worthy of him. When the founder of one of the Four Schools
of Law was asked: “How did you learn such great knowledge?” he replied: “I
listened to everyone, regardless of whether he was great or small.” This should
be the byword of the advice-giver.

Words that are loved and heeded are those that
soothe people concerning this world and the next. There are times when cheering
a broken heart is like bestowing life on it. Even this cheer is a cure reaped
from advice.

And speech is a cure. This cure heals sick
souls. There are occasions when you are healed if you speak. Taking and giving
advice in this way is a remedy for you. This is why the Lord has declared
advice to be a great blessing in His Book. He who makes use of this blessing
prospers.

If you want to heal and be healed, give and
take advice from womb to tomb. This will make you a servant loved by God, who
treads the path of happiness.

11. On Thrift and Management

Dear Kim,

Another aspect to leading a good life is
knowing the importance of thrift. Thrift is the backbone of economy. It is a
principle that plays an important role in both individual and social life.
Those people and societies that have abided by it have prospered, and those
violating it have faced ruination.

If you pay attention to thrift during your
life, you will be exalted in the sight of people and God. Hence the Lord has
commanded: “Eat, drink, but do not waste” (7:31).

Many calamities befall people because of waste.
And much happiness stems from moderation. This is why the Prophet tells us to
remain moderate in all conditions. “Even when you’re beside a great expanse of
water,” he says, “use only the amount that is necessary.” He who observes
temperance in all his affairs—such as eating, drinking, sleeping, traveling,
working, spending, speaking or remaining silent—is a mature and happy person.
His leadership is true leadership, and both his family and society benefit from
him. Such a person achieves all manner of happiness by economizing with not
merely his property, but also his words and his affections. Knowing the science
of thrift is a key to happiness in both worlds.

Managing people intelligently, with propriety
and affection, and treating them well, is the essence of salutary conduct. This
is why it has been said: “The happiness of both worlds resides in just two
words: To be bounteous to one’s friends, and to treat enemies nicely.”

Treating enemies nicely is to be courteous to
them and to manage them in accordance with their state.

As for managing one’s fortune: this is the
backbone of one’s living standards. Whoever spends all his earnings is ruined,
and whoever saves a part of it prospers. For as long as one lives, one is faced
with unimaginable needs. Then he finds punishment if he was a spendthrift. All
of civilization has acted by this principle, and set aside a part of its
earnings for a rainy day. This is why it is not enough to earn; one’s
expenditures must also be managed. On this basis, the Prophet has stated: “He
who economizes will not fall into poverty.”

This is an edifying principle that will serve
you all your life. Another saying of the Prophet goes: “Spending is half of
economy.” This sums up everything for you.

My dear Kim, human beings are responsible for
management in all spheres. All human beings, from the greatest to the least,
are in the process of managing one another. Knowing this, one will progress
profitably. Those who remain ignorant of this are grumpy and ill-mannered.

If you consider things carefully, management is
evident everywhere: everyone—whether captain, commander, mayor, manager, or
father, mother, or child—has the responsibility of management. It is therefore
necessary to treat friends generously, enemies courteously, and maintain
moderation in all circumstances. This will make you perfect, and is the bedrock
of happiness and a life lived well.

As far as you can, try to please everyone in
life. Speech plays an important role in this. Be truthful in word and heart,
don’t make promises you can’t keep, interact positively with people and treat them
deservingly. If you do this, you will be loved and will achieve happiness.

12. On Being Generous to Your Enemy

My Dear Kim,

One of the secrets of living an unruffled life
is to be generous to enemies, and to stay away from politics. To know your
enemy is to be wary of him, but also to win him over by your generosity. Even
his ways may be remedied thus, for the reform of a person varies from person to
person and from time to time.

Love your
enemy, and he will be reformed.

This is why sages have responded to those who
mistreat them with presents. When one great saint heard that a man had
slandered and insulted him, he sent him a feast. And he told his puzzled
friends: “That man, with his ill-placed gossip and slander, has sent me virtue.
And I have sent him a meal. If he is reformed by this, the affection between us
will increase. I will both have overcome my ego, and gained a friend.”

As this anecdote demonstrates, the friends of
God do not break the hearts of their enemies, but try to reform them. They are
perfect and wonderful men. One loves them in spite of oneself. They view and
love creation because of their love for God. Their only thought is to do good
and to reform. This is also why the Prophet of God, when he was asked to curse
his enemies, remarked: “I’ve come to repair, not to harm”—to make things
better, not to make them worse.

This is the way of true human beings, Kim. They
always follow this course, forgive everyone, and try to reform their worst
enemies by bounteous acts.

“But,” you may say, “I’ve seen so-and-so among
the Faithful, and he always quarrels with his family and other people. He
doesn’t treat them like human beings, and says there aren’t any human beings
left.”

Knowledge, my child, is the staff of life. He
who does not look at life through the spectacles of knowledge and wisdom begins
to see it from the standpoint of his own ignorance. He sees the world in
deepest darkness, and is oppressed. He picks on everyone and disturbs the
peace. He wouldn’t recognize the friends of God if he saw them. He would break
their hearts by criticizing them according to his own conceptions.

Such people, my child, are those who have been
unable to rectify their selves, and are proud of their knowledge and worship.
They don’t know that in truth they have been refused by God.

It is best to keep one’s distance from their
sort, and to compliment and treat them well from a distance. For these are
proud persons in the way of worship. But God does not love pride in human
beings.

A saint busied himself with worship day and
night for thirty years. He then received an inspiration: “The coffers of the
people are full of worship. If your aim is Communion, lower yourself, do good
deeds.”

This is why the friends of God humble their selves.
They are never proud toward anyone. They don’t even offend their enemies. A
sage has remarked: “The travellers on God’s way haven’t broken the hearts even
of their enemies. How can you attain to any station, when you quarrel even with
your friends?”

As you can see, the way of the wise is
radically different. You must, therefore, think and act comprehensively. When
you make friends, love those who love God and His Prophet in proportion to this
love. If you have personal enemies, forgive them and treat them generously.

The time may come, however, when confrontation
becomes unavoidable. Sometimes sternness yields better results, because
occasionally sternness is the very cure required—it does things that cannot be
achieved by softness and gentleness. The presence of both kinds of attitude
makes a man mature and perfect. Gentleness (the Blissful approach) won’t always
work; neither will harshness (the Wrathful approach). Perfection, or maturity,
consists in exercising the right approach at the right time, and in the right
proportion. My dear Kim, I pray that God will give you the wisdom to act
properly.

Postscript: Concerning Those “Outside Islam”

My Dear Kim,

Your question regarding those who fail to
believe in God and His divine Messengers has prompted me to add a few more
words. I share your sense of pain for them. The Prophet, too, used to worry
himself greatly about the refusal of people to believe, until God informed him
that his duty was only to proclaim the message, that it was not his concern who
would take it or leave it. As in all matters, here, too, the Prophet must stand
as your model. Where you’re able to, give advice, help others, show them the
Good. Where you can’t, pray for them and try to help them. Never argue; only
discuss in the most appealing way.

How can you help those who do not share our
faith?

The man who does not use the revealed
Scriptures as a guide has an impossible task ahead of him. Instead of picking
the fruit from the tree that has been presented to him, he has chosen to “build
the tree” from scratch! Where can he start? The only certainty is that he will
try to construct his own morality—a system of values to live by.

Here, Kim, is where you might offer some help.
If you know there is no possibility of his heart responding to the Divine, you
can at least help him in the following two respects. For they will go some way
in saving him from misery, and will save others from falling victim to his
ignorance.

1. Forbidden
Gain. Whatever you gain by illegitimate means—and here I mean
illegitimate in God’s sight—will sooner or later be a curse on you for which
you must pay through the nose. No good will come of it, no matter how easily or
how surreptitiously it is obtained. In the final analysis, illicit profit is
never in one’s own best interest. I’m not just talking about outright stealing
or embezzlement here. Islam is so strict about this point that it warns you not
to drink a cup of tea or coffee if you visit a person whose earnings are
suspect in your eyes—that cup will be tainted.

Kim, let me make this crystal clear. Suppose
you’re stone-broke, and you decide to go over to your uncle or friend to borrow
some money from him. Now on your way, you find that the streets are strewn with
thousands of dollars. It’s there, it’s yours for the taking, you didn’t steal
it, and it’s all free!

Under these conditions, you must not take the money. Don’t even
touch the bills. Just wade through them as if they never existed, and continue
on your way to ask your uncle or friend for the measly sum you had in mind.

I know that’s a difficult proposition—it sounds
exaggerated and counterintuitive, but you’ll be better off in the end than if
you’d done otherwise.

Don’t eat an illicit morsel, nor allow your
family (or those under your care) to swallow one. This does not mean that we’re
condemned to poverty, and that legitimate wealth is ruled out. You can be as
rich as you like, so long as you earn it by honest means.

2. Forbidden
Lust. “Do not approach
fornication,” says the Koran. What is meant here is not simply that you should
not indulge in illicit sex, but that you should refrain from even the slightest
movement, the slightest thought, in that direction. (Here’s where Jesus’s
figurative expression: “If your eye offends you, pluck it out” takes on meaning.)
Except for your lawfully wedded spouse, regard all other human beings as your
brothers or sisters, mothers or fathers, or children (it goes without saying
that this rules out incest).

Sex is probably the strongest impulse in man.
If handled unwisely, it is powerful enough to shatter him. In its proper place,
it will lead to worldly and marital happiness. It promises the fulfillment and
contentment of a warm family life. Experimenting with illegitimate
relationships, on the other hand, can only bring on disaster. It can cause the
collapse or destruction of an entire civilization. Fornication, adultery, and
all forms of sexual perversion and depravity put an end to man’s psychic assets
once and for all. It doesn’t make any difference if “two consenting adults” are
involved—this is just an excuse to bypass the hurdle. There is a God-given
trust, a lease, in each human being that must remain inviolate and which s/he
is forbidden to give to another even by his or her own consent, unless in
proper wedlock with a member of the opposite sex.

When God created Adam at the dawn of human
history, He was engaging in the production of His most marvellous, most
complex, creature. This is wellnigh a sacred act. Thenceforth, He entrusted the
creation of further human beings, the propagation of the race, to us. In other
words, we are participators in God’s creation of each new human being. This is
a tremendous responsibility. And, like it or not, this is the purpose of sex.
We may think only about how pleasurable it is, but it is there for procreation.

Now consider what it takes to obtain a
well-formed human being: a minimum of twenty years of nurture, of tender loving
care by both parents. And this is best achieved within a healthy marriage. Sex,
therefore, is a social event. A sexual wrong is a social wrong affecting
everybody, even future generations.

This is compounded in the case of a married
couple. Adultery is the most common cause of marital breakdown. The person
found to be attractive is nothing but a menace to one’s spouse, one’s innocent
children and, ultimately, to oneself. But this lesson is most often learnt the
hard way, because of the refusal to benefit from other people’s experiences.
The sanctity of marriage, my child, must be preserved.

Now these last two points—forbidden gains and
forbidden lust—are so crucial that they can elevate a person to the heights of
sainthood, or plunge him into the depths of misery. Think about it: all the icy
baths of the Brahmins, the sleepless nights of the Buddhist and Christian
ascetics, the self-inflicted tortures of the Hindu fakirs, the seclusion of
Sufi dervishes in mountain caves or dungeon-like cellars—these all served only
one end: the control of the Self. And yet, self-control is actually predicated
on these two critical points alone: illicit pecuniary interest and passion.
This is true not merely for Moslems, but for everyone. Control these two, and
you have no need of all the other ascetic practices mentioned above. Fail to do
so, and none of them will save you. For the ultimate aim of all asceticism is
to tame these two selfish drives, to keep them within permitted, legitimate
limits.

Mark my words, dear Kim, the annihilation of
mankind will be the direct or indirect outcome of failure to hold these two in
check. No matter who you are, by reining them in, you will not merely save your
own neck, but will also contribute to the survival of humanity. And thus, dear
Kim, it is imperative that those “beyond the fold” of Islam should understand
this. Where you can, carefully and intelligently make this known to them.

Well, Kim, this marks the end of my letters to
you on this subject. Save these letters, and read them again from time to time
so you won’t forget. God bless you, and may He give you the wisdom and strength
to carry out these precepts. If you are able to, the day will come when you’ll
remember these letters with gratitude, and perhaps utter a blessing in your
prayers for me, who will be long gone by then.

Bless you,

Your Loving
Father.

PRAYER:
THE ASCENSION FOR ALL

God Almighty instructed Adam, the first man and
first prophet, to perform the Prayer (salat).
Before Adam, the angels had been performing it. This goes to show how important
Prayer is.

Of the Five Pillars of Islam, Prayer is the one
that is repeated most often and requires the greatest perseverance. The Word of
Witnessing, which is the point of entry into Islam, need be uttered only once
(although it can be, and is, repeated many times later on). The Pilgrimage is
incumbent once in a lifetime, and only on those with sufficient means to
fulfill it. The Alms-tax is paid once a year, by the rich and well-to-do to the
poor. The Fasting is confined to the lunar month of Ramadan. Contrast these now
with the Prayer, which is performed five times daily and comprises a total of
40 cycles (raqah), and you will see
what a paramount place it has in the religion of Islam. Indeed, it is the very
axis around which Islam revolves.

Why is Prayer so central to Islam? And why does
it consist, as it does, of a series of repetitious bodily postures and
movements in conjunction with recitation of sacred formulas, rather than simple
supplication to God like ordinary prayer?

When the Prophet of God was raised to the
presence of God in his Ascension (Miraj:
“ladder”), he became closer to God than anyone before or since. And God, as a
gift to the Prophet’s Community of the Faithful, enjoined the five daily
Prayers upon them.

A saying of the Prophet reveals the meaning of
Prayer: “Prayer is the Ascension of the faithful.” Another saying makes clear
that “He who has no Prayer makes no Ascension.”

This means that a ladder (“Jacob’s Ladder”), an
escalator or elevator, has been instituted by God for the faithful to approach
His presence, and this is none other than Prayer.

If a believer performs the Prayer properly and
with the care and attention it deserves, there can be no doubt that s/he will
approach God.

That s/he should fail to be conscious of this
is immaterial. Matters of the spirit are by and large hidden from man’s
consciousness and senses. If the veils were to fall from the believer’s eyes,
s/he would actually be able to witness his or her Ascension in spiritual (as
distinct from physical) space. But it is only at very advanced levels of
spiritual progress that this may become possible.

Two factors can be singled out in the Prayer
process: the first being the bodily postures, and the second the recited
formulas.

The reason for the bodily movements is as
follows:

Man as a totality possesses two aspects—body
and spirit. (We disregard for the time being a third factor, the self). More
precisely, he possesses a physical body, which we all know, and a non-physical,
spiritual body, of which few people are aware. During life on earth, the
spiritual body is connected, engaged, or “coupled” to the physical body.

Hence, the bodily motions in Prayer are
intended primarily for the spiritual
body, not for the physical body (although they have an ameliorating
influence on that as well). By moving the physical body, one actualizes the
movement of the spiritual body, which is
coupled to it. It is this motion of the spiritual body that escalates or
elevates the spirit, not that of the physical body directly.

The second component of Prayer as indicated
above is the recitation of certain formulas, mainly verses from the Koran. If
the postures and movements are the form of Prayer, the recitations are its
content. These both aid in concentration and attach “wings,” as it were, to the
spirit. Thus, the humble Prayer rug beneath one’s feet becomes the magic carpet
or “cosmic treadmill” by which the believer rises towards God.

We shall not go into the details of these
formulas here, but confine ourselves to indicating the repetition of the names
of the Lord.

Two of the Almighty’s names are repeated six times
in each cycle, which makes a total of twelve. Since there are forty cycles in a
day, this gives 480 repetitions.

After the bodily movement part is finished,
God’s names are recited three lots of 33, or 99, times in a sitting position
during each of the Five Prayers. This means that the names of the Lord are
invoked nearly a thousand times a day, even
counting only the bare bones of Prayer and leaving out additional
recitations. This is none other than the invocation or remembrance (known as dhikr) of God.

These invocations help to concentrate the
attention on God and aid the believer’s Ascension in spiritual (not physical!)
space.

All the prophets from Adam to Mohammed, the
last prophet, have been bestowed with Prayer. Bowing down to the ground (prostration)
was common to all, whereas the respective Divine Laws and worship were
different. But they all came with the command to Prayer, and explained its
details to their respective communities.

The Koran mentions that the following prophets
and communities were given the instruction of prostration: David (38:24), the
Children of Israel (7:161), the Virgin Mary (18:107), those of previous
generations (19:59).

Explicit mention is made of the following
prophets in the Koran as having been ordered to perform the Prayer: Moses
(10:87, 20:10), Abraham (14:40), Ishmael (19:57), Luqman (31:17), Jesus
(19:32), Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (21:73).

Since this is the case—and since all prophets
have told their faithful to perform the Prayer—how come we don’t come across
Prayer or some form of it in the observances of other religions?

The truth is that we do, but we encounter only
their remnants. Prayer is the royal road to God, but it is also hard work. At
one point or other, the religious communities of the past fell by the wayside
and abandoned the performance of their Prayer. This is one of the reasons why
Islam had to be revealed, in order to make Prayer “stick” permanently. Yet we
can still find traces of ancient versions of Prayer in some observances of the
Hindus, in the Asanas of Yoga, and in the practices of far-eastern religious
philosophies such as T’ai Chi Ch’uan in China.

Furthermore, close inspection of the Bible
reveals that aspects of Prayer can be found there as well, even though it may
no longer be practiced regularly. Indications of this are present both in the
Old Testament and the New.

Worship, prayer and bowing down to the ground
are mentioned in the Torah, revealed to Moses (Genesis 24:52; Exodus 33:10,
34:8), in the Psalms of David (5:7, 95:6, 138:2), and the Old Testament in
general (1 Kings 18:42; Nehemiah 8:6, 9:3; Daniel 6:10, 8:18, 10:9; Ezra 9:5; 2
Chronicles 7:3).

Special attention should be drawn here to 1
Kings 18:42. The form of prostration here prescribed for the prophet Elijah, so
similar to the Islamic prostration, was continued within the Judaic tradition
by the Merkabah (“Throne” or “Chariot”) mystics between the 2nd and 10th
centuries A.D. That is why they speak of a descent
to the Chariot, the latter term designating the posture of prostration.

For the various references to prostration
(bowing down to the ground) in the New Testament, one may cite Matthew 26:39,
Mark 14:35, and Luke 22:41 as examples.

Moslems perform the Prayer by facing Mecca
(more precisely, the Cube or Kaabah)
as the focal point (qiblah). It is
interesting to find the same concept in the Old Testament, where people
worshiped by facing the Old Temple in Jerusalem (the Temple of Solomon) (Psalms
5:7, 138:2; 1 Kings 8:30,35; Daniel 6:10). As a matter of fact, Moslems
initially Prayed facing Jerusalem to underline their fraternity and continuity
with the previous two great monotheistic faiths (Judaism and Christianity),
until commanded by God to Pray facing the Kaaba, thus emphasizing their
distinction from the other two.

We ourselves have tried to find a
way around Prayer, a place in the Koran which explicitly or implicitly bypasses
it. In this we have been singularly unsuccessful.

In the end, we had no choice but to perform the
Prayer. And we have done so to this day.

All the saints, the Friends of God, have found
a path to God only in performing the Prayer. They have been able to approach
the Throne of the Almighty only in this way. Hence, no one who fails to do the
Prayer should lay claim to sainthood, and such a person should deceive and
mislead neither himself nor anyone else.

THE MEANING OF REPENTANCE

That human beings should repent their sins is a
divine commandment. Since the concepts of good and evil and of sin are
constellated differently in Islam, however, we must first take a look at these
concepts, even though the Islamic conception of repentance is not fundamentally
different. What thoughts or actions require repentance; what do we repent for?

In Islam, anything that furthers the material and spiritual well-being of
human beings and their fellow men is
defined as Good or meritorious, and anything that is the opposite of this is
defined as Bad or sinful. In other words, what is called a sin in the Koran is
nothing other than what is harmful to man. In some religions, Good and Evil
have been considered as having almost equal power over man, and Evil has been
assigned a place that can even overwhelm Good. In such conceptions, Evil has an
unremitting and even unmitigated status, and Satan, the principal agent of
Evil, is the master, “the prince of this world.” This leads to the notion that
this world, the world we live in, is essentially corrupt and evil, and that
salvation from evil is to be sought only in the Otherworld or Afterworld.

In Islam, on the other hand, this world in
itself is not evil at all. Satan himself does not possess any great power; his
guile and his hold over human beings are described as “feeble” in the Koran
(4:76). Human beings need only disregard his suggestions or “whisperings,” and
they will be safe from doing what is bad. God wishes the best of both worlds
for human beings, His creatures, and there are no insurmountable obstacles in
Islam to the realization thereof.

There is no Original Sin in Islam. Human beings
are not genetically tainted with an ineradicable sin that infests even newborn
babes and pervades you like some terminal illness. Human beings come into this
world pure; their moral responsibility begins at the age of puberty, and,
provided they abstain from sins, they can leave this world as pure as the day
they came into it.

But to err is human, and the concept of “sin”
in Islam is almost synonymous with error or mistake. For these errors, in turn,
the doors of divine compassion and mercy are wide open for those who repent.
All but one of the chapters of the Koran begin with “God, the Compassionate,
the Merciful,” and the Lord’s Mercy is emphasized throughout the chapters as
well. The sole unforgiveable sin, in God’s view, is that anything should be
associated with Him; there is nothing worthy of being adored, loved, feared or
worshiped other than He. “Less than that He forgives to whomever He will”
(4:116). And if one repents once one sees the error of one’s ways, God will
forgive even this sin.

Traditionally, there have been two conceptions
in the world regarding sin. One of these results in irresponsibility, and the
other is total responsibility.

The first of these is to load one’s sins on a
scapegoat—in some cases, on God Himself. If one confesses, one is absolved, and
is then scot-free to repeat the same sin until one confesses again, and so on ad infinitum. This naturally fails to
prevent the same sins from being repeated over and over again. It does not
discourage people from committing the same sins.

The second approach holds that one is
responsible for one’s sins. Even if one confesses, one remains under the burden
of that sin forever, and only the grace of God can save one—if it arrives. This places a burden of
guilt on human beings that crushes them, and may even lead to despair of the
divine mercy itself. Neither of these is the case in Islam.

In Islam, one is responsible for one’s sins,
and for one’s sins alone. “You are charged only with yourself,” says the Koran
(4:84). “Every soul earns only to its own account; no soul bears the load of
another” (6:164). This is echoed by St. Paul: “every man shall bear his own
burden... whatever a man sows, that shall he also reap” (Galatians 6:5,7). This
precludes the scapegoat approach. Sinners are exhorted not to despair. Fear
not, says the Koran: “Whoever does evil, or wrongs himself, and then prays
God’s forgiveness, he shall find God All-forgiving, All-compassionate” (4:110).
If one repents with a sincere regret, there can be no doubt that one’s wish
will be granted. “Whoever of you does evil in ignorance, and thereafter repents
and makes amends, He is All-forgiving, All-compassionate” (6:54). The only
requirement is that one should resolve not to repeat that particular sin, and
have a sincere intention not to sin again: as Jesus said to a sinful woman,
“Go, and don’t do it again” (John 8:11). To ask forgiveness also implies that one should first be able to forgive oneself,
as well as others.[26]
Consequently, one is not left with a burden of guilt, and on the other hand is
not left open to a repetition of the same sin. To repeat a sin already repented
for would be to trifle with God—not at all a good idea.

But why did God create human beings with the
capacity to sin in the first place? “If you did not sin,” says God, “I would
create a people who sinned in your stead.” This indicates that sin has a place
in God’s plan for humanity, and for the universe as a whole. Compassion and
Mercy are among God’s foremost Names and Attributes (and there are several more
of the same kind). People must sin in order to repent, and they must repent in
order to activate divine mercy. In other words, God’s Mercy would not be
realized in the world if it were not for the fact that human beings can, and
do, sin. Another reason is that spotless Perfection belongs to God alone. All
of His creatures, including human beings, are necessarily lacking in perfection
in one way or another, and this includes the tendency to err. Thus, repentance
is a part of man’s return to his Lord.

In passing, let us note that one should never
underestimate small sins. A small sin is as dangerous as a great sin; sometimes
more so, because if disregarded it paves the waylittle by little, step by
stepto greater sins. Here, the Prophetic precept: “What is harmful in large
quantities is also harmful in small quantities” should be applied in order to
protect oneself.

The Boomerang Effect

In Islam, God has made a distinction between
wrongs against Himselfdisobedience of His lawsand wrongs perpetrated against
His servants—i.e., all His creatures, beginning with our fellow men. His
forgiveness for sins encompasses wrongs against God. As for wrongs against His
servants, we must try to correct these while in this world, making amends for
our errors against God’s creatures, setting a wrong aright and asking
forgiveness of those we have victimized. A great secret lies buried here—for
God has embedded a divine spark within the least of His creatures, and as you
do unto the least of His creatures, you do unto Him—through the portal of that creature. Wherever your error impinges
on, it must be corrected in the same locus. All creatures, great and small, are
God’s big family; we should avoid killing even a snake, a pest, or a scorpion if it isn’t doing us any harm. We should
“live and let live.” Divine justice does not allow so much as a sparrow one has
injured during childhood to pass by without retribution, often while we are
still in this world. This is why the Safeguarders (muttaki: God-fearers, those who safeguard themselves by taking the
precautions of religion) take care not even to step on an ant. This is the true
meaning of “Do as you would be done by”: any action carried out on the world
boomerangs back on youwhat astrophysicists Fred Hoyle and J.V. Narlikar, in
another context, called “the response of the universe.” The way out here is to
undo a wrong by doing a right of equal importance; this may be called
“atonement through action.”

No
matter how far we stray from God’s path, repentance will pull us back onto it
like an elastic cord attached to our waists. Repentance is itself a form of
worship, and its root meaning in Arabic is “to return”—both in the sense of the
believer’s turning back to God’s Straight Path, and in the sense of God’s
turning back from punishment and retribution. A sincere regret and the
intention to mend one’s ways will result in the activation of God’s Name: the
Acceptor of Repentance (Tawwab: “the
Oft-Returning in Grace and Mercy,” 110:3). This means that God is always ready
to forgive, to relent, and to shower us with His Grace.

All prophets have themselves repented and shown
the way of repentance to their followers, beginning with Adam and Eve (2:37,
7:23), and continuing with such great prophets as Noah (11:47), Moses (7:151)
and Abraham (14:41). Mohammed, the Seal of the Prophets, himself said: “I
repent to God seventy times a day from the things that invade my heart.” If
this should be the case even with God’s Beloved Prophet, think how much more
necessary repentance must be for us. The Prophet’s following prayer is a good
one for us as well: “Dear God, I take refuge from your Wrath in your
Forgiveness; from You, I take refuge again in You.” That is to say, we should
seek shelter from one of God’s (wrathful) Attributes in another of His (benign)
Attributes. We should always seek absolution with God, repeating the plea:
“Wipe out our sins, and grant us forgiveness; have mercy on us” (2:286); we
should implore Him to “convert our sins into virtues.”

Naturally, we have—we earn—the right to be forgiven to the extent that we ourselves are
compassionate and forgiving. It has been related in a Tradition of the Prophet
that in the Afterlife, those who have forgiven wrongs done against them will
enter Paradise directly, without the hurdle of the Last Judgment. To the extent
that we are compassionate and merciful, we participate in God’s own Attributes
of Compassion and Mercy, and thus become Godly. If we are unforgiving and
hard-hearted, how can we expect to have the right—the “face,” or lack of
shame—to ask for God’s Mercy when we
are on the spot?

Ideally, every prayer should begin with
repentance. It is stated in another Tradition that: “Those who wished to
repent, but could not, have come to ruin.” Repentance clears the self of bad
attributes and opens the way to good works. Thus, it is also the key to
progress from one level of selfhood and from one plane of existence to another.
Because one cannot reach Realization until the Purified Self has been attained,
and one should repent for remaining at any lesser level. As one Moslem saint
remarked: “Your greatest sin is your individuality”—i.e., your existence
separate from totality, your failure to realize that you are part of the whole.
Once the Purified Self is reached, repentance continues in order to avoid
falling back to lower levels. This is similar to swimming in a body of water:
one has to kick one’s feet until one reaches the surface from the depths, and
once there has to keep on kicking in order to remain afloat. (The same holds
true for Prayer and other observances.)

Thus repentance, like Prayer, is necessary at
every stage of one’s spiritual development. There is no sin so terrible that it
cannot be forgiven by God. God has said: “My Mercy encompasses [i.e., is
greater than] my Wrath.” He has also stated that there are times when He
descends to the sphere of the earth, asking: “Isn’t there anyone who wishes for
mercy, that I may grant it?” The door of absolution is always held open to
those who would correct their ways, and this is one of the cardinal assets of
the Religion of Mercy. But neither should it encourage us to act cavalierly
with respect to God’s prohibitions. It should not be treated as an excuse to
indulge in sin, and we should always be careful where we step if we really wish
for forgiveness. Safeguarding ourselves is our prerogative; mercy is God’s.

While dealing with repentance, we should not
forget thanksgiving, its complement. We live in God’s countrythe universe. We
breathe His air, are dressed in His clothes (our physical bodies), we enjoy His
gifts. If we can thank even a waiter for services rendered, surely we must show
gratitude to God for everything He has granted us. Thanksgiving can take place
every day, every moment of the year.

God’s mercy is vast. Not for nothing did Rumi,
the Sufi mystic, say: “Come. Even if you have repented and broken your
repentance a hundred times, come again. This is not the door of despair.” Which
means: come to repentance again.

Our Lord,
You are forgiving, You like to forgive; forgive us, too. Amen.

OUR PRAYERS

(These prayers are the common property of all mankind. They can be
recited either after Formal Prayer, or at any other time. Remember us, too, in
your prayers.)

Dear God, our
Creator, thanks and praise be to you.

May God’s blessings
and peace be upon Mohammed and his family.

In the name of God,
the Compassionate, the Merciful:

Dear God, grant that we may sow peace wherever
we go. Let us be reconcilers and unifiers, not sowers of dissent. Allow us to
disseminate love where there is hate, forgiveness where there is injury, faith
where there is doubt, hope where there is despair, light where there is
darkness, and joy where there is sorrow.

Dear Lord, help us to be not of those who see
the failings of others, but of those who hide them; not of those who seek
consolation, but those who console; not of those who wish to be understood, but
those who understand; not of those who crave to be loved, but those who love.

Grant that we may become like the rain, which
bestows life without discrimination wherever it flows; like the sun, which
enlightens all beings everywhere without distinction; like the earth which,
though everything steps on it, withholds nothing and bestows its fruits on
everyone; like the night, which hides all shames from view.

Grant us the destiny to join the ranks of those
who give rather than receive, those who are forgiven because they forgive,
those who are born in Truth, live in Truth, die in Truth; and those who are
born again in eternal life. Amen.

My God, may your peace and blessings on
Mohammed, his dynasty and his loved ones be numerous as your creatures, in
proportion to your pleasure, weighty as the Highest Heaven and in the amount of
the ink spent on words.

My Lord, make me one of those whose hearts
belong to you and who place their trust in you. We are poor servants, enrich
us; we are weak, fortify us; we are sinners, forgive us. Maintain our constancy
on the path of the religion with which you are pleased.

My God, I wish in this world for the
opportunity to worship and the wisdom to avoid sins; and in the afterworld for
your Paradise, the sight of your countenance and safety from your chastisement.

0 refuge of the derelict, true friend of the
forlorn, you are my confidant and beloved in both this world and the next.
Reclaim my soul as a Moslem at my death, rectify my self. You are the final
arbiter in all worries and complaints. You are the ultimate purpose of all
desires. Please have mercy on the tears of this petitioner. To whom shall I
turn for help, when you are the sole possessor of all? In whom shall I take
refuge, when you are the sole benefactor, vast in generosity and grace?

My Lord, give us the ability to perform deeds
with which you are pleased. Grant us life through our worship of you.

My God, do not turn down my prayer. Do not
leave me to my own devices. Have mercy on my impotence, take pity on my
weakness and wretchedness. Do not mete out to us the treatment we deserve.
Protect our hands from reaching out to someone else just as you protect us from
prostration to others.

My God, may your blessings and peace be upon
Mohammed, his family and his companions: such blessings as will save us from
all kinds of fears, afflictions and similar ills; will ensure our security against
all troubles, plagues and disasters, worries and misfortunes; will cleanse us
from all shames and shortcomings, sins and rebellions; and will result in a
pardon for all our sins and an answer to all our prayers. Amen.

My Lord, I take refuge from your chastisement
in your forgiveness and pleasure; from you, I take refuge again in you. I
cannot exalt you as you have exalted yourself.

My God, keep me as far from sins as you have
distanced East from West.

My Lord, give me a faith and certainty that
does not end in unbelief; bestow on me a mercy that will earn me your honor in
this world and the next.

My God, grant us a fear that will serve as a
barrier between us and our sins, an obedience that will win for us your
Paradise, and a faith that will ease the burden of worldly ills.

My Lord, make my life an occasion for the
increase of all that is good, and my death the means for liberation from all
that is evil.

My God, I take refuge in you from the fearless
heart, the insatiable ego, the knowledge that is useless and the prayer that
remains unanswered.

My Lord, number us among those who are saved
and who bring salvation to others.

We take refuge in you from a wasted life,
senility, miserliness and poverty.

Help us in worshiping, remembering, and giving
thanks to you.

My Lord, you are forgiving, you love to
forgive; hence, forgive us too. Amen.

Most Merciful of mercifuls, protect me from the
Fire, save me from severe chastisement. Amen.

THE SECRET THAT IS LOVE

The secret of religion is love.

Religion is a divine law.

The secret of religion is Law (rights). The
secret of Law is conscience. And the secret of conscience is love.

Religion comprises these three in the same way
that a fruit is composed of rind, of a fleshy part and a core. Although the
core is not apparent from the outside, it is the innermost, the active part.
The heart of all religion is love. Love gives rise to conscience, to
consideration, to compassion and to tolerance.

The Law is the external covering of all this.
It prevents the flesh and the core from being spoiled and destroyed. Although
it may not, at first glance, appear to have much in common with its contents,
in reality it is directly based on them. Just as conscience arises from love,
Law in turn arises from conscience. It is merely the codification of rights
already granted implicitly at the level of conscience.

The Secret that is Law

Law is a delicate balance between rights and
duties, between liberties and limitations. The duty of one person is nothing
but the right of another, and the limitation of one is the freedom of another.
Absolute freedom cannot exist, and if it could, then law, and hence justice,
would not exist. It is as if freedom were in short supply and had to be
apportioned equally. For the increase of one’s freedom occurs only at the
expense of another’s, and if justice is not distributed equally, that is
injustice. Hence we have equality before the law, and equality before man’s law
is based on equality before God’s Law, since all men are equal before God.

Because Law is based on conscience and
ultimately on love, what is lawful in Islam is that which is informed by love.
To put this is a little differently, the only action which is free of blame is
that which is based on love, and the Divine Law is a compendium of such action
or non-action.

The all-important conclusion from this is that
even if you do not feel love for a creature, you will have done it no wrong if
you treat it according to the prescription of Divine Law. Thus Islam answers
the critical question: “How should I behave toward beings?” in the following
concise way: treat them as if you loved them, in the same way as you would act
if you loved them. And for our convenience, Islam outlines in its prescriptions
of Holy Law what such action is.

In religion, Law means righteousness above all
else. For instance, a person must not touch or covet what does not belong to
him. When we say law or rights, this doesn’t mean only those rights pertaining
to humanity. Law means to recognise the same right for all beings in the
universe, whether animate or inanimate, from an atom to the sun. It is the
requirement of being human and of being a Moslem to treat them in the same way.
For all beings are the beings of God. If one claims to love God, one absolutely
must love His beings as well. One who does not love existence cannot be said to
love God. In view of this, our own personal choices of what is good and bad,
beautiful and ugly, useful and harmful, attractive and repulsive, have no place
in Law. If these become involved, they precipitate the wrath of God. Here, to
like or dislike is one thing, and Law is another.

The inability of human beings to truly progress
arises from their failure to understand this point. He who does not abide by
the Law is the greatest of sinners and has no inkling of what it means to be
human. About this there should be no doubt whatever.

Man is free to act according to his
disposition. He may not take an interest in any being he dislikes, which he
finds bad, harmful or repulsive. But if for any reason an interest or
relationship is established, he must recognise their rights. This is because
man is responsible for rights, and for rights alone.

Whether one is a Moslem or a Christian is
immaterial at this point. For this is where the door of happiness opens. All
beings are the forms, the manifestations, of God’s names. Therefore, the holy
books declare God’s order unanimously: “You are to think of the other as you
think of yourself.” For all beings, whether animate or inanimate, contain His
spirit.

It is due to this fact that where Law is
concerned, no one can act according to his whim. God has forbidden this. For
His command is not whim, but the very yardstick by which all things are to be
measured. The human heart is His holy dwelling-place which He has reserved for
Himself. He who breaks a heart will suffer, even if the poor fellow doesn’t
understand why.

In reality, man is the representative of God
and His viceregent over creation. As such, he is burdened with the utmost legal
responsibility and obligation. He is responsible for all things living and
nonliving, from the stone he steps on to the bird in the sky. This is why the
People of God say: “The requirement of honesty is to consider one another,” and
they do not show negligence in serving this rule.

God has graced man above all beings and placed
them under man’s care. If a mishap occurs, however, this is due to us. If man
becomes corrupt, everything becomes corrupt. If man is polluted, all nature is
polluted. Hence the present state of nature can stand as a mirror to our
internal state. We should know that this is so and touch everything with “In
the name of God” on our lips, replacing it with these same words. We should
never forget whilst using something that it possesses spirit. We should treat it
in the same way as we treat and care for a part of our own body. Then the
Koranic statement: “You are pleased with God and He is pleased with you”
(89:28) becomes reality—that is, you will be pleased with Him and He will be
pleased with you. This is the answer that heals (makes whole).

The Secret that is Conscience

Law is derived from conscience. Without
conscience, there would be no consideration of others and no respect for their
rights. In fact, not even the existence of such rights would be recognized.
Conscience requires the implicit presupposition that “the other” is, at some
basic level, the same as or at least not different from the self. This leads to
an unexpected conclusion, that the so-called “positive sciences” are, in fact,
covertly normative. Behaviorist psychology, for example, by taking the other
and his inner world as an unknown, by treating the other as a “black box” that
can be judged only on the basis of exhibited behavior, reduces people to the
status of automatons, quietly revoking their claim to rights. This, in turn, is
nothing but lawlessness where the “other” is concerned. All rights then belong
to the self, and to the other?-None. This is nothing but injustice.

This also indicates the need to be very careful
with our sciences and philosophies. It is never very obvious what metaphysics
lurk behind our “objective” hypotheses or conclusions—nor where they may lead.
If metaphysics is an ineradicable residue underlying all science and
philosophy, then it is much better that this be of a life-enhancing, rather
than life-denying, nature.

Conscience is the prime mover of Law—it creates
and resonates in the heart and mobilizes man. If a person does everything
lawfully, in the way prescribed by Law, believing in its utter rightness and
content in his heart about its truth—this, then, is conscience. This is the
foundation of Law; another name for it is “faith.” It is the “still, small
voice” that comes from the depths of one’s heart. It is the product of an
indubitable, pure and undefiled feeling. May God grant us all that state, which
comes to us on a tide of the ocean of compassion (Amen).

If man has no faith, neither does he possess
conscience. Lacking conscience, he also lacks humanity. Blessed are those who
recognise Law and have a clear conscience, for God is with them.

The Secret That Is Love

Love is the real source of man’s feelings of
compassion and kindness, the sublime synthesis of his finest and most delicate
feelings of conscience. Since the sway of conscience has purified the heart,
purging it of all things, good and bad alike, God installs His throne of
manifestation in that heart. Thus love of God engulfs one’s being, and that
person becomes pure love. Then everything loves him and he loves everything.

And so, that person becomes invested with God’s
attributes and friendship, harmony and welfare, and joins His Chosen People.
Henceforth, his place in both worlds is Paradise and his station, comfort and
friendship.

This is a three-stage process: (1)
Righteousness, diligent observation of the Law enabling (2) the conscience to
flower—and the full maturity of conscience is (3) love.

But what happens once one becomes, as it were,
an incarnation of love? Does one shed the Law and conscience as if they were
autumn leaves?

On the contrary, the Law and conscience find
their fullest, most mature, manifestation in a person who has become pure love.
Rote Imitation becomes Realization. He or she no longer acts out of blind
obedience to the letter of the Law, but in full knowledge and consciousness of
why the Law prescribes or prohibits a certain thing. The clumsy, mechanical,
sometimes jarring and disturbing implementation of the Divine Law gives way to
a smooth, harmonious flow—the grace of love. Such people are a guiding light to
all beings lucky enough to come within their sphere.

Such a person is called a saint, or a “friend
of God”, and has become identified with pure love. The motto of the friend of
God is “I, if I be lifted up, will lift up all mankind with me.” The saints are
the channels or vehicles by which God’s love, compassion and mercy reach the
world. Indeed in ages when there are many saints of high realisation, there are
fewer wars, plagues and calamities—the world is a “closer” place to Paradise.
In ages when they are few and far between, these channels of access to grace
are “clogged,” as it were, and the situation is reversed. Look around you and,
with this measure in hand, you will be able to judge what kind of times we live
in.

Seven Hells, Eight Heavens

Islam is based on eight principles. These are
referred to as the eight gates of Heaven:

1. Compassion,
kindness and affection.

2.
Righteousness.

3. Loyalty.

4. Generosity.

5. Patience.

6. Discretion.

7. Knowing
one’s poverty and weakness.

8. Giving thanks to God

Without these, there is no peace, happiness or
Paradise in either world.

Anyone who is clothed in these praiseworthy
traits and has made them part of his constitution is a proper Moslem and worthy
of the Noble Messenger of God, Mohammed. For these praiseworthy manners and
characteristics are the beautiful traits and attributes of our Prophet. They
have radiated from him to his family, children and Companions, thence becoming
the fundamental constituents of Islam. So testifies the Koran.

And this is why Islam is not simply the
recitation of the Word of Witnessing or the search for Heaven in a mosque. The
firmness of God’s revelatory secrets depends on these qualities; hence, so do
the continuance of life, its peace and happiness. Throughout one’s life one
must always be based in the good, the true and the beautiful. Only with these
verities are immortality and eternity feasible.

It is for this reason that the above principles
have always been a guiding light and torch in the hands of mankind and the
travelers to Truth. Just as one cannot see in the dark or find one’s way,
neither can he reach his Lord. God says: “Be light, come to Me, attain My
mystery,” and desires us. Our great Prophet exemplified the meaning of this
declaration in his Ascension (the Miraj).
Without these lights of truth, in the darkness of our ignorance, how could we
find the way to our Lord and be worthy of His Pleasure?

Therefore, these agreeable traits and
characteristics are what is valuable, whether at the stage of general Law, or
of mystical schools (conscience), or of attaining Reality (love).

Without them, a person cannot be worthy of his
Lord, no matter whether he is a prophet or a madman. This is the secret of the
Four Books and the Hundred Pages revealed to the various Prophets. These eight
principles are the sources of life for humanity and human conscience that
bestow happiness, peace and joy.

All the virtues and merits in the world are
encompassed by these traits. This is why they have been called the eight gates
of Heaven. Those who possess them live in Paradise even while in this world.

As for the seven circles of Hell, the following
are the traits that open their gates:

1. Pride.

2.
Covetousness.

3. Envy.

4. Discord.

5. Backbiting.

6. Lust.

7. Anger.

All the evil traits
and manners in the world are, in turn, contained in these. No matter what or
who he is or how true he may appear to be, these are the characteristics that
lie close to a person’s heart if he does not acknowledge goodness, beauty and
truth. It makes no difference if he never raises his head from prostration.
Being human and being a Moslem are both possible only by relying on Truth.
Islam cannot be attained by following the lead of one’s caprice, by being
carried away by one’s ego, by exhibitionism or by fishing for other people’s
praise. One will then have opened the gates of the seven Hells, pride,
rebellion and downfall.

Note, however, that there are eight Heavens as
opposed to only seven Hells. This is because God Almighty has said: “My Mercy
encompasses (is greater than) My Wrath.” Indeed in Islam, “In the Name of God,
the Compassionate, the Merciful” precedes everything. No matter how great one’s
sins, they are swept away in a torrent of Divine Compassion and Mercy, provided
one resolves to rectify one’s ways in accordance with the Law. The opportunity
for absolution is always there, and never far away.

For the secret of religion is love.

PUT YOUR TRUST IN GOD

1.

Bad things to good, God modifies

Think not He does otherwise

Always watched on by the wise—

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

2.

In God you should put your trust

Surrender yourself, find rest at last

With everything He does, be pleased

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

3.

Put in your heart of His strength a dose

Recognize what He doth dispose

Abandon what you propose

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

4.

He is the Compassionate Creator

He is the Benevolent Provider

He is the Wise and Divine Author

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

5.

The Final Judge in any claim:

Direct your prayers toward Him

Let go of your personal whim

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

6.

Don’t crave after a thing or cause

Don’t be stubborn if one occurs

It’s from God, do not refuse

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

7.

Since matters are in God’s hands, vain

Is any confusion or pain

He unfolds Wisdom divine

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

8.

All His deeds are superior

And in tune with each other

Everything He does is proper

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

9.

Keep sorrows distant from your heart

Find comfort instead in your Lord

Just leave everything to God

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

10.

Don’t deem justice to be malice

Surrender, don’t burn in the Blaze

Don’t give up or give in—patience!

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

11.

Do not say: “Why is this so?”

It is good that it is so

Look, see how the end will go

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

12.

Look down on no one, nor slight

Don’t give offense, don’t break a heart

With your ego never side

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

13.

A believer’s deed is never vice

A wise man’s way is never strife

A sage’s speech won’t agonize

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

14.

His patience is a grace on me

His ruling, my security

The Lord God is my deputy

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

15.

His name resounds in every call

His remembrance in every soul

His rescue is for one and all

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

16.

Just when your hopes are down to nil

Suddenly He parts a veil

He grants solace from every ill

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

17.

In each moment to each servant

Whether wrathful or beneficent

He’s at a task each instant

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

18.

Now Complier and now Preventer

Now Harmer and now Benefiter

Now Debaser and now Upraiser

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

19.

Now He makes His servant a sage

Now malignant, now virtuous

0ver every heart He rules

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

20.

Sometimes He makes your heart empty

0r fills your spirit with beauty

0r makes you His loving devotee

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

21.

Simple one time, complex the next

Sometimes He makes your heart perplexed

Happy one moment, sad the next

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

22.

Sparingly eat, sleep, and drink

Give up carnality, it is junk

Settle in the rose garden of the heart

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

23.

Yourself with His creatures do not strain

Nor with your ego remain

You and your heart, keep close the twain

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

24.

With what is past, fall not behind

What is yet to come, don’t mind

Even in the present, don’t reside

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

25.

Unceasingly His name recite

Cunning and shrewdness, cast aside

Admire Truth, Truth articulate

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

26.

Isn’t it time you were amazed

Discover Him, yourself forsake

Cast away sleep, become awake

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

27.

Every word contains advice sound

Every object is much adorned

Every action is a godsend

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

28.

A symbol and portent are all things

A sign of good news are all things

A fountain of grace is everything

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

29.

Lend ear to anyone who speaks

Understand Him who makes him speak

And with all your heart accept

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

30.

The languages of things proclaim

“Truth, 0 Truth!” they all exclaim

Creation’s courtesy ascertain

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

31.

Yes, He has done very well

0f
course He has done very well

Indeed He has done very well

What God will ordain,
let us see

Whatever He does,
well does He

—Ibrahim Hakki of Erzurum

WOMAN IN ISLAM

“Men are one-half of an apple; women are the other half.”

—Mohammed, the
Messenger of God

The Way of God, the mode in which God has
chosen to manifest Himself, is revealed to us through the workings of nature.
And these workings are often displayed in the form of complementary opposites.
Day and night, light and dark, high and low, long and short, positive and
negative are just a few examples. In Chinese philosophy the multitude of
opposites was summarized in the polarity of yin
and yang, the first symbolizing
the dark, passive, female aspect and the second, the light, active, male aspect
of things. It is even said that the universe comes into being through
opposites, for a thing cannot be manifested without its opposite. Light, for
example, can only be distinguished against a background of darkness, and so on.
This reciprocity extends from the macrocosmos down to the microcosmos, where
quantum physicist Niels Bohr has shown that the wave and particle models of
nature consummate each other in his famous Principle of Complementarity.

It is noteworthy that polarity in nature does
not always imply symmetry in every respect. The proton and the electron—the
building blocks of the universe—are complementary in charge, yet the proton is
almost 2000 times as massive as the electron. A similar disproportion exists
between the female ovum and the male sperm, the latter being minute in
comparison with the former. Where sexual reproduction is concerned, nature
abounds in examples of asymmetry, as evidenced in the queen bee versus male
bees, or a large female black widow spider versus its small male counterpart.

When we come to human beings, we find that man
and woman are almost identical with one another except for certain biological
differences. It makes no sense to speak about sex in the case of the soul
itself; the self is unitary and asexual. Yet the biological differences are
there, and they are too deeply rooted and obvious to be dismissed. A male
cannot bear a child no matter how hard he tries, and the anatomy of a female
constitution could not become masculine without a complete and wholesale
revision.

Rather than trying to accomplish the impossible
and eradicate biological differences, then, what we should do is to take man
and woman as they are and give them their rights. The needs of a woman are
different from those of a man. If these needs are not taken into account, we
would be violating the rights of one side or the other.

Islam has laid down the rights of both man and
woman without disregarding the differences peculiar to each. Care should be
taken, however, to avoid entangling what is specifically Islamic with other,
extraneous influences. If we wish to learn the truth, we need to research the
matter more thoroughly.

The history of Islam is, by and large, the
history of the failure of so-called “Islamic” nations to live up to the high
ideals of Islam, as much as it is of their success. Islamic societies have, it
is true, tried to remain faithful to the injunctions of the Koran and the noble
example of the Prophet. But it is also obvious that in this they have not been
entirely successful. This is why calls for a “return to the roots” are sounded
so frequently, but historical inertias that lie deep seem to preclude any easy
change.

What is necessary, then, is to look at what Islam in fact says. Ideals are
always difficult to translate into practice, but the shortcoming here lies with
all-too-human failings, not with the ideals themselves. The Koran and the
example of the Prophet should be read properly, sensibly; and in order to be
read properly at all they should first be read.

When we look at Islam’s perceived lore
concerning women today, what we see is actually the result of several intertwined
factors, especially:

The Prophet’s Example

Once we attempt to unearth the specifically
Islamic element from under these—as it were—geological strata, we find that the
only thing to do is to go back to the original example, that of the Prophet
himself. We have to supplement the Written Koran with the concrete example of
the “Speaking Koran,” who constitutes the only true role model for Moslems.

The Prophet was the archetypal family man,
doing household chores, even mending his clothes and shoes when necessary. That
is the model, not only for Moslems but for all men, that Islam aspires to. And
it is not just a model, but a challenge for us all.

“The best among you,” remarked the Prophet,
“are those who treat women well.” One of his wives, in a heated discussion,
once struck the Prophet with her hand. Her mother saw this and chided her,
saying: “Daughter, what are you doing? Do you realize who this is?” The
Messenger of God, however, intervened and said: “No, no, don’t say anything to
her. My blessed wives are all like this. Don’t say anything against any of
them.”

On another occasion, he and another wife were
having a heated discussion. At one point, she began yelling at him. When her
father, who had overheard, raised the subject with her, she replied simply that
all the Prophet’s wives enjoyed similar liberties with him.

It cannot be emphasized enough that among all
his wives, the Prophet never, ever struck
any of his wives or children, not even once. He never raised his voice
against them, nor said a bad word, even when they quarrelled with him.

“I have been made,” said the Prophet, “to love
three things in your world: women, perfume, and Prayer, the light of my eyes.”
This Tradition not only highlights the otherworldly nature of the Prophet; it
also draws attention to the intrinsic sweetness of the three items, and in
associating women with Prayer, draws attention to the sacred nature of women
and of marriage, which is the only approved way for relations between the
sexes.

The Prophet was born of a woman and was married
to women. And if there have been more great men than great women in history, we
too often forget that every great man, and every prophet except Adam, was born
of a woman, and that—to repeat a well-worn cliché—behind every great man there
is a woman: whether as mother, wife, or supporter.

Common Fallacies Regarding the Status of Women

We have already noted that the Koran has
frequently been read improperly, and without reference to the Prophet’s
example. This is especially true of the verses dealing with the status of
women. What has happened is that meanings have been read into them which
actually are not there. An attempt will be made here to demonstrate this by
discussing a few examples: the most common fallacies.

Fallacy 1: Men are the masters and women are their slaves

The Koran reads: “... men are the overseers of
women” (4:34). That is, men are the supporters and protectors of women and
children. Barring outright slander, there is no way that one can extrapolate
from this to a master/slave relationship. To make things clearer, the Prophet
said in his Farewell Sermon: “Treat your women well. You have no right to
oppress them.” And at another time: “The best among you are the best to their
wives.” And: “The believers of the most perfect faith are those who exhibit the
best moral conduct and are kindest to their families.”

Fallacy 2: Men are superior to women

The verse reads: “... men have a degree over
women” (2:228). On the average, men
have a slight edge over women in terms of physical strength. Needless to say,
this excludes a broad range of exceptions, and is true only in a statistical
sense. The same verse notes that “some are better than others,” but does not
assign gender to this latter expression. Indeed, there are untold numbers of
women who are superior to men in knowledge, in work, and in physical strength.

Fallacy 3: Men can beat the daylights out of women

“Admonish [or: reason with] women whom you fear
may be rebellious. [If this is not enough] depart from their beds. [If this
doesn’t work either] slap them. If they then obey you, don’t search for a way
against them” (4:34).

The word translated as “slap” above derives
from the Arabic root DRB and is usually translated as “beat.” Now it so happens
that words derived from the same DRB root occur 58 times in the Koran, and
nowhere else is it used (or translated) in this sense. Of the many other
meanings assigned to it, a few are: to set out (on the road), to shroud (in
darkness), to strike (an example), to mint (a coin), to publish (a book), to cover
(concerning ladies’ dresses), to dispatch, to throw, to raise (something set
down), etc.

It can thus be seen that “beat” is by no means
the obvious translation of such a word. Assuming, however, that there is a
grain of truth in the interpreters’ view, it has been rendered here by “slap,”
for as we shall see below, the sayings of the Prophet, as well as his example
which we saw above, strongly militate against the use of violence where women
are concerned.

Men are told to strike rebellious women lightly only as a last resort. What could be the
nature of the rebellion that would justify such a measure? On an occasion in
which the Prophet spoke of “disciplining without bruises or injuries,” and also
in the Farewell Sermon, this is linked with adultery. For as the verse says,
the measure is used not when a woman is
actually “rebellious,” but when one merely
fears it. And this can be justified only on the grounds of infidelity.
Otherwise, anything could be made a pretext for violence, which is surely not
what is intended by the verse. To prevent adultery, if one can, before it
happens—this seems to be the only justification for the measure. For adultery
is the one sure way to wreck a marriage, and if the latter can be saved in this
manner, we have a rationale for the action.

Indeed, the Tradition itself speaks of overt
fornication: i.e., if a man actually witnesses his wife with another man, he is
entitled to “discipline” her; yet even here the recommendation of Islam is to
divorce her peacefully rather than to engage in violence. Of course, there can
be no question of remaining together after such an event has been witnessed. Of
all permitted things under heaven, the most detestable in God’s sight is
divorce, yet there are occasions where it is unavoidable.

Over and against this we have to set the
following sayings of the Prophet: “Those who beat their wives are not good
men.” “I myself will be the claimant on Judgment Day against the man who beats
his wife.” “Could any of you beat his wife as he might a slave, and then lie
with her in the evening?” Reliable collections contain Traditions of the
Prophet to the effect that he forbade the beating of any woman, saying: “Never beat God’s handmaidens.” All this goes to
show that the Koranic sanction can be invoked, if at all, only under the most
exceptional of circumstances.

Fallacy 4: One man equals two women

The Koranic verse reads: “... the male receives
two shares of the inheritance, the female one share” (4:11,176). But this is
qualified by the decree: “Men support women from their means” (4:34). Thus, the
upkeep of the sister(s) are incumbent on the brother(s). The reverse is not
true, even if a sister earns her living and a brother does not. Further, this
is only one of the injunctions regulating inheritance, and hence one among a
host of legal cases.

Fallacy 5: One male witness equals two female witnesses

When taken out of context, the Koranic verse
indeed reads: “... two male witnesses, or one male and two female witnesses, so
that one of them can remind the other” (2:282). When read in its proper
context, however, it becomes clear that this applies only to a certain subset
of commercial law—namely, in cases of commercial liability with a maturity
period, and Letters of Credit.

Social and Cultural Factors

When a religion emerges into a society, it
never finds a blank slate before it. No matter what society we are talking
about, it has customs, mores and traditions that antedate the introduction of
that religion, and which color its response to the latter.

This basic fact of sociology and anthropology
is also observed in the case of Islam. Islam itself is universal. But the
response of every culture to Islam will be conditioned by its own peculiar
characteristics.

The people of the Middle East where Islam
originated belonged to a male-dominant culture. The period before Islam,
referred to as “the Age of Ignorance,” was replete with the ill treatment of
females. A woman was a vehicle for sexual satisfaction and little else—lacking,
in many cases, even the legal protection of a marital arrangement. Little girls
were disposed of by burying them alive. Very few women had the means to become
prominent and powerful members of society. Women could be gambled on and given
away in bets; they could be inherited like a household object.

Against this backdrop, Islam introduced almost
every right that women enjoy in the 20th century. The right of women in France
to exercise property rights independently of their husbands was granted only at
the beginning of the 20th century. In Italy, the right to divorce had to wait
until the last third of the 20th century. God’s instruction to the Prophet to
accept the allegiance of women (60:12) has been interpreted by Moslems as the
right to vote; in the USA, women could not vote until 1920. Today, at the end
of the 20th century, universal suffrage still does not exist in Switzerland. In
Germany, a woman could not hold a bank account until 1958, in France until
1965. The true emancipation of women in Europe is the matter of a scant fifty
years.

Now it may come as something of a surprise that
women were granted all these rights, explicitly or implicitly, not today, not
yesterday, but one thousand four hundred
years ago with the emergence of Islam. Mohammed, the Messenger of God, effected
the elevation of womankind, not in an age of emancipation, but at a time when
woman did not count for anything at all. He put an end to female infanticide.
Above all, Islam introduced the treatment of woman as a person; much later, in the Middle Ages, Europeans would be debating
whether a woman has a soul and should be considered human or not. The greatness
of this achievement has to be measured not against what humanity has
accomplished today after millenia of struggle, but in its own historical context.
Moreover, as we shall see below, woman still lacks those very same rights given
by Mohammed even in this day.

Certain measures which may at first glance look
like restrictions actually worked to the woman’s benefit. It may be difficult for
us, living as we do at the pinnacle of civilization, to assess what a giant
leap this was in comparison with what preceded it. For example, in transactions
dealing with commercial debt having a maturity period, a second female witness
might be called in, but this relieved the first from the burden of having to
face singly the responsibility of remembering complicated numerical details. A
woman might receive less of a share in inheritance, but this was balanced by
the fact that the male heir was responsible for supporting her. Thus, in many
cases, she lost a pittance but gained lifelong security in return. Giving her
an equal share would result in male protest and the removal of this privilege.
Moreover, this happens to be only a particular case in Islamic law—there are
many other cases where she receives a greater or even an equal share. Further,
a woman didn’t have to take care of anyone else and was totally free to
dispense with her money as she liked. She didn’t (and doesn’t) have to spend a
penny for her livelihood even if she were rich; her husband had (and has) to
take care of her. She doesn’t have to breast-feed the baby or do household
chores if she doesn’t want to; the husband has to find a foster-mother in one
case, and a servant in the other. She cannot be married off by her parents to a
man she doesn’t want—as long as you abide by Islam, that is.

We can see that regulations which at first
appear to be detrimental to women were actually meant, and worked, for their
benefit (“positive discrimination”). In the early days of Islam, furthermore,
women were accorded much more freedom than was forthcoming later on—they could
accompany their menfolk in war, act as nurses, engage in commerce and trade,
etc. Karen Armstrong, the author of an important biography about Mohammed,
merely tells the truth when she observes: “Women were not crushed by Islam, as
people tend to imagine in the West.”[27]

As time passed, however, old social
habits—atavisms from the Age of Ignorance—began to reassert themselves. Also,
as Islam spread to other lands and other cultures, it was forced to assimilate
the mores and norms of those regions
as well. Some of these, the religion could tame; there was too much
sociocultural resistance against taming others. What justification can be found
within Islam, for example, for the clitoridectomies performed in North Africa?
None whatever. The result was that, over the course of the centuries, elements
foreign to Islam and its protection of women became blended into the mixture.
The interaction of Islam with a different culture would of course lead to
altogether different results.

The case of the veil is a peculiar one in
itself. The veil existed in the Middle East prior to Islam—the Virgin Mary is
depicted wearing a veil in the early churches. Apparently, it first began as a
measure to ensure protection from the male tendency to exploit and molest
women. Therefore, legislation for covering is not against women, but rather
against the lack of self-control of men with respect to women (sexual harassment,
to say nothing of rape, is a worldwide problem even in our day).

Covering themselves in a general sense is
enjoined on both the Prophet’s wives and women in the Koran (24:30-31) as an
aspect of modesty. Originally, only the Prophet’s wives were required to veil
themselves; this was their exclusive privilege. In time, the veil became a
status symbol and fashionable among women. As Armstrong remarks, “Islamic
culture was strongly egalitarian and it seemed incongruous that the Prophet’s
wives should be distinguished and honoured in this way. Thus many of the Muslim
women who first took the veil saw it as a symbol of power and influence, not as
a badge of male oppression.”[28]
It was only later on that the veil became a sign of female seclusion in a
patriarchal society, and was transformed from an emblem of superiority into its
exact opposite.

There is also another dimension to this. The
headscarf is worn by Catholic nuns, and in their case it is revered as a sign
of holiness. There is no reason why Islamic usage of the headscarf should not
be accorded similar respect.

The sayings or “Traditions” of the Prophet have
also undergone a process of “socialization” or “acculturation.” It is known
that spurious Traditions were invented at various times, and in a culture with
a certain attitude towards women these inventions would tend to be
correspondingly biased. However, collectors of Traditions have made painstaking
efforts to separate spurious Traditions from authentic ones. Since the Prophet
himself indicated that false Traditions would be invented in his name, one
should be very careful in handling sayings that go against the general tendency
of Islam, which can be summarized as respect for women, within an overall
spirit of tolerance, compassion, and mercy.

Political Factors

Without doubt, rulers exert an influence over
the societies they rule. This influence extends to the laws of a society, and
the religious law of Islam—the Holy Law, which is comprised of Koranic rulings,
the sayings and example of the Prophet, derivations based on analogy, and the
consensus of scholars—has not been exempt from it. Rulers have found it
expedient to reinterpret religious law according to their own lights.

Take the case of Saudi Arabia, where the
restrictions on women are more severe than in other Islamic countries (they
cannot drive a car, for instance). Saudi law requires that anyone bringing
narcotics into the country be decapitated, and the Saudis claim that this
practice is firmly based on the Holy Law. Yet there are other Islamic lands
where this is not the case, for the simple reason that narcotics as such didn’t
exist at the time when Islam was revealed. How then could the Holy Law have
ruled beheading as punishment for a narcotic offense? It is not the attempt to
draw analogies from precedents that is at error here, but rather that rulers
have passed laws of their own and called these “the Holy Law.” Besides, every
severe Koranic ruling is followed by a verse that absolves the repentant,
emphasizes God’s Compassion and Mercy, and exhorts human beings to emulate
these qualities. This is a clear case where Islam is used as a front to cover
up other intentions, which are mainly aimed at keeping a specific society under
political control. And women, too, have received an unequal share in this
process.

Environmental Factors

When you throw a stone into a still pond, you
are bound to get ripples. At least some of the repercussions in the Middle East
appear to be caused by comparatively recent developments.

Without engaging in any value judgments, we
wish to draw attention to an objective fact which has too often been
overlooked: namely, that the presence of Israel has modified response patterns
in the Middle East. This seems to be a part of Middle-Eastern reactions to the
more general ascendancy of the West. People’s attitudes appear to be modulated
by “the Western challenge,” and the result has been reinforcement and
retrenchment within an overall defensive stance. Just as liberties are
curtailed under extraordinary circumstances, Middle-Eastern nations,
intimidated by continual encroachments against what they regard as their
geographical and cultural territory, have overreacted with puritanism, and
women have received their share in this.

About Polygamy

Polygamy was a mark of distinction in ancient
society; according to the Bible, David had a harem (2 Samuel 5.13), Abraham, Jacob (Genesis
32.22) and Elkanah (1 Samuel 1.2)
each had two wives, and Esau had several (Genesis
28.9). Solomon had 700 wives plus 300 concubines (1 Kings 11.3). A man of high standing was expected to take many wives.

Another reason for polygamy is that wars
deplete the male portion of the population, and there are fewer husbands to go
all around. This is not merely a problem of the past. In early 1996, Buryat
women—who live in the vicinity of Lake Baikal—were campaigning for polygamy,
saying that their people were on the verge of extinction and that it was better
to be the second or third wife of a good man than the only wife of a drunkard.

The Old Testament sanctions unlimited polygamy,
the only requirement being that: “If [a man] takes another wife to himself, he
shall not diminish the food, clothing or marital rights of the first wife [or
wives]” (Exodus 21.10).

The Prophet of God was strictly monogamous with
his first wife, Khadija. He was 25 and she, 40 when they married; in the prime
of his powers, he remained faithful to her for more than a quarter-century. As
she grew older, Khadija suggested to the Prophet that he take a second wife,
but he always laughed off such suggestions. After her death, with the spread of
Islam, he had to take several wives for various political, diplomatic or
protective reasons, though among them his true love was only one, Aisha, whom
he married when she was still very young (in Medieval Europe, too, it was
customary for nine- or ten-year old girls to marry). Professor Laura Veccia
Vaglieri remarks: “With the sole exception of Aisha, [Mohammed] married women
who were neither virgins, nor young nor beautiful. Was this sensuality?”

The important thing is that the Prophet was legally married to all his wives, even
to slave-girls with whom he was presented. In Islam, not multiple marriages but
illicit sex—fornication and adultery—is immoral. Islam limited the number of
female consorts to four (but recommended one), and this with the proviso that
all were brought under the protective umbrella of legal marriage. On the other
hand, the right for a woman to divorce a man was granted from the start: when
Umaima wished to divorce the Prophet she did so, receiving gifts during the
split.

In a society with a tradition of an unlimited
number of wives, polygamy could not be eradicated immediately. The Koran,
however, curtailed this number and said: “You can take up to four wives, but only if you can treat them all equally”
(4:3), adding the rejoinder: “You cannot treat them all equally” (4:129). Thus,
the Koran recognizes polygamy but paves the way for monogamy.

As far as sexual satisfaction is concerned, one
spouse is enough. Yet there have always been sexually overactive men in all
societies who could not control their egotistical drives and who have had
carnal relationships with more than one woman. Rather than leave such “Don
Juan” types to wallow in the sin of fornication and adultery, and in order to
secure legal marital rights for their consorts, the Koran did not ban polygamy
entirely. The verses quoted above, however, indicate where its true preference
lies.

If the Koran allows a man with several wives
(polygyny), why not a woman with several husbands (polyandry)? This is one of
the cases where asymmetry in nature asserts itself. If a man has several wives,
the parents of any offspring are immediately identified. The father is known,
the mother is known, and hence it is immediately obvious who is responsible for
a child. If, however, a woman has sexual relations with more than one man, the
mother is known but the father is not. Therefore, it is not certain who will
take responsibility for the child other than its mother—in the end, no one might.
But this is practically the same situation as that found in prostitution, and
social rights cannot be properly established for women and children under
polyandry.

Views of Western Orientalists

The West has had a long-standing interest in
the Islamic religion, and has studied it at great length. Scholars who
specialize in this field are known as orientalists. Of course, there have been
biased persons among them; but there have been fair ones too, and even in the
case of the most biased, professional integrity has at times caused them to
acknowledge the truth. Let us now see what Western orientalists and historians
have to say concerning the treatment of women in Islam.

Sir Hamilton A.R. Gibb: “That
[Mohammed’s] reforms enhanced the status of women in general by contrast with
the anarchy of pre-Islamic Arabia is universally admitted. ...critics have
tended to overlook the almost unfailing patience which he displayed even under
provocation and the gentleness with which he attended to the griefs of all sorts
of women and comforted them, even at times to the extent of revising his
legislation.”

Alfred Guillaume: “...it is laid down
that wives are to be treated with kindness and strict impartiality; if a man
cannot treat all alike he should keep to one. The husband pays the woman a
dowry at the time of marriage, and the money or property so allotted remains
her own.”

Stanley Lane-Poole: No great lawmaker
has ever made such significant changes as Mohammed did on the subject of women.
Rulings concerning women have been outlined in the Koran in great detail. This
is the point at which Mohammed’s greatest reforms have occurred. Although these
reforms may appear insignificant to a European, they are actually tremendous.
The restriction placed on polygamy, the recommendation of monogamy, the
introduction of degrees of prohibition in place of the appalling collectivism
and intermixing of Arab marriages, the limitations on divorce, the duty of a
husband to take care of his ex-wife for a certain period even after they are
divorced, the severe rulings to ensure her livelihood, the introduction of the
novelty that women are legal heirs—even if at half the rate of men—so that
children may be properly looked after, and the ability of a widow to receive
her dead husband’s inheritance—all these constitute a programme of far-reaching
reforms.

Will Durant: Mohammed put an end to
female infanticide. In court cases and financial matters, he made woman the
equal of man. A woman can enter every legal profession; she can keep her
earnings for herself; she can inherit money and property, and use her fortune
as she desires. Mohammed removed the Arab custom by which women passed from
father to son as part of the inheritance.

Laura Veccia Vaglieri: Even though woman
has risen to a high social status in Europe, she has not, at least until
recently, attained in many countries the independence and liberty enjoyed by a
Moslem woman in the face of the law. In reality, the woman in Islam possesses
the right to share in inheritance, even if to an extent less than her brothers;
the right to marry according to her own choice and not to tolerate the ill
treatment of a brutish husband; but further, the rights to receive dowry payment
from her husband, to have her needs met by her husband even if she is rich, and
to be absolutely independent in the disposal of her inherited property.

Gaudefroy-Demombynes: The rulings of the
Koran, which are amazingly in favor of woman, provide her, even if
theoretically, with a status better than present [19th century] European laws
allow. The Islamic woman has the right to a separate fortune in financial
matters. She owns her share, her property received through donation or
inheritance, and her labor’s dues to the end of her life. Although it is
difficult for her to make practical use of these rights, her sustenance,
shelter and other requirements are guaranteed in accordance with her standing.

Clement Huart: It is the duty of the
husband to take care of his wife. He does not have the right to force her to
work in a job that conflicts with her social standing, or to work at all in
return for pay.

These
testimonies of well-known historians and orientalists demonstrate that the
discoveries of Western research in this field have not yet become common
knowledge.

Family Life

“We created you [both man and woman] from a
single soul” (4:1), says the Koran. This verse points to the basically unitary
and nonpolar nature of the soul, or self; it is asexual, and man and woman are
not merely equal, but identical in this respect. As far as the Koran is
concerned, the only inequality worthy of note is that based on closeness to
God, which has nothing to do with maleness or femaleness, wealth or poverty,
race, nationality or prominence: “Surely the noblest among you in the sight of
God is the most Godfearing of you” (49:13). Another way to read this verse
would be: “The only superiority in God’s sight consists in preserving oneself
from evil.”

“There is no monkery in Islam,” said the
Prophet. This and the fact that he was married indicate that spirituality and
raising a family are not mutually contradictory or exclusive. Spirituality does
not require celibacy. An ordinary householder can enjoy sex and raise children
without forfeiting true spirituality. In other words, spirituality and family
life do not violate each other. Men and women, says the Koran, are garments of
one another: “They are a garment for you and you are a garment to them”
(2:187). God “has created spouses for you among yourselves so that you may
dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has planted love and mercy between you.
In that are signs for people who reflect” (30:21).

Men and women are often mentioned in the same
breath in the Koran, emphasizing their equality in all but a very few respects.
Here, for instance, is a beautiful verse from the Koran (33:35), in Arthur J.
Arberry’s superb interpretation:

Men and women who have surrendered [i.e.
are Moslems],

believing men and women,

obedient men and women,

truthful men and women,

enduring men and women,

humble men and women,

men and women who give in charity,

men who fast and women who fast,

men and women who guard their private parts,

men and women who remember God oft—

for them God has prepared forgiveness

and a mighty wage.

Islam’s egalitarianism
is brought out in another saying of the Prophet: “It is mandatory for every
male and female Moslem to learn knowledge (science) and to research.” The
Koranic verse: “Men shall receive the fruits of their labor, and women shall
receive the fruits of their labor” (4:32) not only guarantees the labor rights
of women on an equal parity with men, but also causes Islamic law to recognize
personal responsibility for actions, irrespective of sex.

But when the Koranic teachings are plumbed for
their deeper meaning, one finds that the Koran is trying to protect a third
thing rather than either man or woman alone, and this is the family.

“Paradise,” said the Prophet, “lies under the
feet of mothers.” This means not only that they are superior even to Paradise,
but that one can earn a place in Heaven only by pleasing one’s mother. Islam
has only the highest praise for mothers; the task of raising a family is
regarded as almost sacred. Parents and children are signs of God’s mercy and
magnificence.

In Islam, not individuals as such but the
family is the basic unit of society; if the former are atoms, the family is the
molecule that provides continuity and stability. Most of all, man and woman are
co-workers with God in the production of new human beings. The creation of a
new human is not a task to be taken lightly. It requires a minimum of twenty
years of careful nurture in a warm, loving family environment; otherwise the
task can easily end in an abomination which can jeopardize not merely the
family, but society itself. Therefore, having and raising children is a matter
of the utmost gravity. Free sex devalues children, and thus humanity.

When sex, which is nature’s way of reproducing
the species, is divorced from its true intent and made to serve man’s pleasure exclusively, that is when things begin
to go wrong. Hence, it is illicit sex—adultery, fornication and the like—that
Islam is against. Since it has no conception of original sin, sex in itself is
not a defiling act, nor is woman held responsible for the fall of man, and
hence is not viewed as despicable. Women are considered holy in Islam.

In ecology, nature responds to violations of
its balance by trying to eliminate the cause. In the field of forbidden sexual
relationships, venereal disease is nature’s way of kicking back. Again, the
only way to protect oneself is to engage in a healthy marital
relationship—which is all that Islam is advocating.

Islam is not alone in condemning extramarital
sex. The sages of every time and clime have recognized the necessity of
marriage for a balanced, clean, and healthy life. When Theano, the wife of
Pythagoras and also his spiritual successor, was asked how much time is
necessary for a woman to become pure after having had relationship with a man,
she replied: “If it is with her husband, she is pure immediately; if it is with another, she never is pure.” Of course, this holds
true for the man as well.

Women in Islam have an important role in the
education of society. They are not simply the instructors of their children,
nor teachers in primary school, but guides that train people at every age. The
first precedent for this was the Prophet’s wife Aisha, followed by his other
wives, who gave instruction to everyone in religious matters.

Love and the Sufis

According to the findings of modern psychiatry,
the story of sexual perversion is essentially the story of sex without love.
Hence, it goes without saying that love is the most important thing in a
relationship between man and woman. As Édouard Schuré pointed out, “it is love
which justifies marriage.” And marriage, in turn, sanctifies love.

Romantic love entered Europe in the Middle Ages
through the troubadours and minstrels, who in turn were inspired by the Moslem
Moors, Saracens, and the Sufis of Andalusia. Idries Shah has convincingly shown
in The Sufis (1964) that the latter
gave the gift of romantic love to the West. As mystics, the Sufis have always
been more liberal-minded than the literalists, and this holds true also in the
case of women.

The Sufis regard love between the sexes as a
mode of something higher, as a station on the way to divine love. Love of a
male or female may lead on to the more refined love of God. For the Sufis, in
fact, sexual love is metaphorical; in deeply loving another, we love the very
essence of that person, which is none other than the Divine Mystery, from which
derives the Sufic claim that true love is man’s love for God. Thus, in the
deepest, most fulfilling love, man and woman discover the divine in each other.

Hence, family life at its best will lead to the
blossoming of God’s love in the hearts of both man and woman, and their
happiness will be incomparably enhanced. Then they will give thanks for
themselves and for all creation, and because they are the sentient
spokespersons for that creation, they will truly be “God’s viceregents on
earth” of which the Koran speaks: they will become vehicles of God’s Compassion
and Mercy.

One of the outstanding Sufis who valued women highly
was Ibn Arabi, also known as “the Greatest Sheikh.” Ibn Arabi always stuck to
the letter of the Koran, so it is unthinkable that he should have strayed
beyond the bounds of Koranic doctrine.

Because the creative action (of reproduction)
takes place in woman, says Ibn Arabi, she is closer to the Creator than man.
“In some respects,” he says, “woman is superior to man, and is his equal in
most other cases” (Futuhat). He
subscribes to the association between a male heaven and a female earth as a
poetic metaphor, which was also prevalent in ancient cultures. He indicates
that in all matters concerning women, one female witness is worth two fair male
witnesses.

Ibn Arabi is of the opinion that the
differences between men and women are few and negligible. These differences
give priority sometimes to one side and sometimes to the other, balancing each
other out when taken all together. Deficiencies in both men and women with
respect to each other are compensated by surpluses in other areas. Thus a
balance is struck between the sexes, and the meaning of the Prophetic
Tradition: “Men are half of an apple, women the other half” becomes manifest.
Ibn Arabi also notes, again correctly in terms of the Arabic, that the
Tradition: “You are all shepherds and responsible for your flock” applies to
men and women alike.

“In the name of God, the Compassionate, the
Merciful,” begins the Koran. Both the attributes of Compassion and Mercy in
Arabic derive, as Ibn Arabi points out, from the root RHM. The significance of
this derivation is especially brought out in the case of the Merciful (Rahim)—it also means the female womb,
which encompasses, protects and nurtures the baby within. The Merciful is
etymologically derived from the Compassionate (Rahman), and points to a higher concentration of grace. Indeed, all
that exists is brought into being and nourished by the attribute of Compassion,
whereas the gift of Paradise­—the attribute of Mercy—is reserved for the
faithful as a special dispensation from God. Believers thus benefit from both
Divine Names, one universally extensive and the other, intensive. Woman is the
honored, if unwitting, bearer of a Divine Name. And it is a cosmic divine
mystery that the universe and Paradise are brought into existence and sustained
by Compassion and Mercy respectively, which are both feminine attributes.

Ibn Arabi indicates, furthermore, that women
are not necessarily ruled out when men are mentioned, for women may possess
attributes that we customarily associate with men. Gender references in a
language are not always gender-specific. In English, too, bravery—to take an
example—is a characteristic normally associated with masculinity. But can we
thereby claim that there are no women who are brave, that Joan of Arc, for
instance, was not brave? Again, God is referred to as “He” in English, but this
does not mean that God is a man—for the Lord transcends both male and female.
Such quirks of language should not be allowed to fog the issue. Likewise, the
female gender in speech does not necessarily exclude men, for there are men who
share attributes we ordinarily link with femininity.

Contemporary Societies

Esmé Wynne-Tyson has put our modern predicament
in a nutshell:

It is quite certain that if woman
continues to regard unceasing materialistic labour as a proof of progress, she
will not only be unable to share [increased] leisure but will have no time to
civilize—even when she is capable of it—either her husband or children.
Moreover, by such blind acquiescence to the plans of our modern Pharaohs to
turn the world into a large State-termitary, she is rapidly losing her soul, or
divinity... : her sense of spirituality, her natural response to beauty, her
innate womanliness most perfectly expressed in selfless maternal love.[29]

Women have been downtrodden in almost all
societies. In some societies they have been regarded as wicked for hundreds of
years, and today they are reacting against this. What is right in their cause
should be acknowledged, without, however, going to the extreme of—in Hobbes’ words—”the
war of all against all.” For in the end, men and women have to live together.
Can we separate them, with a nation composed entirely of men on the one hand
and a nation of women on the other? We cannot.

In our age, with all its liberties and sexual revolutions,
women are still looked upon as sex objects. In fact, the rhetoric of sexual
liberation has been used to give women a false sense of freedom, and they have
been conned into thinking that family ties and marriage are chains. As a
result, men have become free to take their fill of women without any of the
responsibilities imposed on men by family life. Woman is reduced to an object,
to be cast off after man has satisfied his sexual pleasures. This is nothing
but a re-emergence of the Age of Ignorance—to such an extent, in fact, that
female infanticide is still practiced today in China. Further, as women have
gained their economic independence they have felt more at liberty to terminate
a marital relationship, as if economic support were all there is to marriage.
The result is the increase of single-parent families. The delicate connective
tissue—a home, a father and mother—without which a human being cannot be
nurtured properly is being sundered. Karen Armstrong has drawn attention to the
fact that our “view of women and the relations between the sexes is confused.
We preach equality and liberation, but at the same time exploit and degrade
women in advertising, pornography and much popular entertainment...”[30]

From the extreme of belittling and vilifying
woman for centuries, we have today fallen into the opposite extreme of
unlimited sexual freedom. Beneath all the rhetoric masquerading as rights and
liberties, however, there still lurks the same cynical disregard for the
well-being of women.

Sweden is a country that has moved earliest and
farthest in the direction of sexual freedom. Hans Nestius, National Chairman
for Swedish Sex Information, summarizes the results as follows:

The laws that
existed against pornography in the past represented hypocrisy, narrow-mindedness
and the oppression of sexual life. We wanted to open the door a bit and let
some air and light come in. We hoped that sex would cease to be something
mysterious. We expected that freedom would at first create a wave of
pornography, but that in time, the initial interest would be lost and
everything would return to normal. But after a decade had passed, it was clear
that events had progressed contrary to expectations. Today the pornography
market has become much richer than what it used to be. Furthermore, rape and
prostitution have increased along with deviant relationships. Another
development has been the intensive and extensive rise of alcoholism. It is
known that 80 out of 100 Swedes are clinically alcoholic at the present time.[31]

Today as never before,
female nakedness is used for the advertisement of products and universally
abused by the media. Organized crime has progressively escalated what is known
as the “white-slave trade.” In our supposedly emancipated civilization, woman
and the display of her body have become a commercial commodity. This has to be
recognized for what it is: a crime against humanity. Illicit sex, the
prostitution even of little girls, has become a large-scale industry. The
hypocrisy of this situation is obvious: the sexual exploitation of the female
is depicted as freedom, leading to her acquiescence in a plot that enslaves her
to the most degrading existence.

The point is that the degradation of woman is
the degradation of humanity—of man and child as well. Woman should be restored
to her rightful stature, and supplied with her God-given rights—rights
recognized by Islam 14 centuries ago.

Conclusion

Finally, we have to consider whether, or to what
extent, woman’s present status is part of a much deeper problem. Is her
predicament the disease itself, or only one of its symptoms?

The last few centuries have witnessed the
progressive “desacralization” of humanity—the withering away of the Sacred, the
disenchantment of the world, its “ungottierung” or “un-Godification” as
expressed in German.

Yet if the divine exists within human beings,
they are, by this very act, turning their backs on their center, their source.
When the connection between the heart and the mind is severed, the heart ceases
to inform the actions of the mind. It is replaced by the ego—the egotistical
self (nafs), as the Sufis call
it—which then commandeers the mind to fulfill its every whim.

Hence, what we observe today are the results of
the ego unleashed: global exploitation, the dehumanization of humanity, viewing
each other (and hence, women) as objects rather than God’s subjects; the
devastation of nature; mass culture and commodity markets exploiting the basest
in man, the reduction of human beings to their lowest common denominator as
“consumers” and nothing more.

It is precisely here that Islam vouchsafes a
fuller meaning for humanity. It reiterates the truth, first expressed by Jesus,
that “man does not live by bread alone”, that he was meant for higher things.
Having reached the zenith of material affluence, it calls on us to complement
this with spiritual wealth, in order
that the full meaning of “civilization” may be realized.

The essence of Islamic law is protection. And the Moslem, as defined
by the Prophet, is “a person whose hands, sexuality and tongue do not harm
others.” The aim of this protection is for people to become fully human—both by
being safe from the injury of others, and by not injuring them—and thus to realize
God’s purpose in creating human beings on earth.

Our problems can be traced to the lack of the
feminine principle of Mercy, the life principle, the ability for Compassion,
the protector of life unto death. God’s manifestation of this principle needs to
come into the world now, and to be realized in each human heart.

The ideal relationship between the sexes is one
in which one woman and one man are committed to each other, and in which that
commitment is tested as true by life. Both support and protect each other in
such a blessed relationship, and are both the teachers and students of one
another.

Islam can help us by reminding us that marriage
is the proper environment for this togetherness. Its instructions to both man
and woman are simple: “Don’t oppress your spouse, don’t hurt your spouse’s
feelings.” Islam’s counsel is always mutual tenderness, gentleness and concern.
“Live with them in kindness,” enjoins the Koran; “even if you dislike them,
perhaps you dislike something in which God has placed much good” (4:19).

The family is the basic unit for social and
spiritual development, the theater for clean relations and service and
spiritual progress. Spirituality is not a separate “discipline” at odds with a
spouse and children. Marriage is the proper format for the sacred task of
raising a family: one of the clearest signs of God’s mercy and magnificence is
revealed in the actual difficulty and selflessness of this act, if endured.

But further, Islam also invites us to
rediscover the wellsprings of sacredness within ourselves—to apply brakes on
the ego run rampant, to replace the hegemony of egotism over the mind with
cooperation between mind and heart; to stop
harming others by treating them as puppets of our egos, and to become full
human beings.

This also points to the inability of most
“Islamic” nations to truly live up to the wealth of their own tradition.
Perhaps we all have something to learn from Islam—some of us by examining it
anew, some of us by rediscovering its still-untapped resources, and some of us
by coming to it for the first time.

ISLAM AND DEMOCRACY

Islam is a religion, not a political system
or a political ideology. But because it is a holistic religion, neither does it
exclude politics altogether. Being the religion of all humanity for the rest of
time, Islam could not be tied down to any specific polity, since down through
history its adherents would live under a variety of political forms, one of
which is democracy. Although it does not advocate this or that specific regime,
investigation of the Islamic religion reveals that it is libertarian,
egalitarian and that it supports social justice. As such, Islam comes closest
to democracy among the political systems of our day.

But is democracy itself a perfect system?
Or is it now practiced in the best possible way? In-depth consideration will
reveal that an Islamic morality is necessary for the proper operation of
democracy. Western countries famous for their democratic traditions are able to
realize democracy to the extent that they possess elements of Mohammedan
ethics, however ignorant they may remain of this fact. And the apparent present
dead-ends and difficulties of democracy can only be resolved by a higher,
Islamic, morality. From this point of view, the Koran is democracy personified—as
the following intends to demonstrate.

The intention of this article is to investigate
the connections and relationships between Islam and democracy. Recent times
have seen a profusion of views being aired labeling Islam as “totalitarian” or
“totalistic”. The existence of few democracies among the fifty or so Islamic
nations in the world is advanced as proof in support of this thesis. It has
therefore become a necessity to analyze the extent to which Islam is compatible
with democracy.

It should first and foremost be indicated that
the lack of democracy in many Islamic countries is due, not to Islam, but to
other factors. First of all, the subject has to do with security and anarchy.
No government can give in to anarchy or allow it to be victorious. Second, the
political regimes in Islamic countries have as little to do with Islam as the
military junta in Burma (Myanmar) has to do with Buddhism, or Hitler’s Germany
had to do with Christianity. The great majority of Islamic nations today are police
states under occupation by their own armies. But the reason for this is not
religion, and certainly not Islam. Rather, it is the result of various internal
and (more often) external factors of a social, political and economic nature.
It would be unjust to put the blame which is their due on Islam. Turkey is, so
far, fortunate in being independent enough of these factors to be able to
preserve its democracy whilst being an Islamic country.

But our purpose here is not to present an
analysis of the conditions that render democracy unfeasible in Islamic nations.
Rather, we intend to investigate how favorable and proximate Islam itself is to
democracy. And we wish to take this research deeper than has been done
hitherto.

Those who claim that Islam lacks a democratic
structure might wish to point out that the history of Islam is strewn with
sultanates, empires and kingdoms, not with democracies. But this, too, cannot
be considered a valid yardstick. In the contemporary world, democracy has a
history of only about two hundred years. The democratic nations of Europe were,
until recently, kingdoms themselves, and some are still ruled by constitutional
monarchies. As for the dictatorships of the recent past, to which the term
“totalitarian” is eminently more applicable, some of these converted to
democracy in 1945, while others have done so only recently. In history, on the
other hand, democracy has been seen in no land and religion with the exception
of ancient Greece and, perhaps, Switzerland. This may be attributed to the
general progress of humanity with time. What is important is this: Is the
religion of Islam a help or a hindrance to the advance of mankind toward
democracy? So many vacuous arguments have seen daylight without touching upon
what is essential in this matter that the present investigation has become a
pressing need.

Islam and Theocracy

The favorite example of those who find Islam
and democracy to be mutually exclusive is the regime founded by Ayatollah
Khomeini in Iran. It must at once be pointed out that a very special
interpretation of Islam, not approved by nine-tenths of the world’s Moslems,
dominates Iran. The failure of the Iranian regime’s efforts to spread its brand
of revolution is clear evidence that the political ideas that lie at its roots
have not met with general acceptance in the Islamic world.

Certain Shi’ite writers have explicitly stated
that what they want is an “absolute theocracy”. But the saying of Mohammed, the
Prophet of Islam, to the effect that “There is no clergy in religion,” has
closed the doors on the hegemony and rule of a priest class right from the very
start. An organized Church of the form in Christianity or Buddhism does not
exist in Islam—it is a churchless faith.
If it had, it should have emerged during the Prophet’s lifetime or the
immediately succeeding period of the Four Caliphs at the latest, not in Iran in
1979 A.D.

To read the Koranic verse: “Judgment belongs
only to God” (6:57) as: “Sovereignty belongs only to God,” and thus extrapolate
to politics, would also produce theocratic tendencies. For what is intended
here is the absolute sovereignty of the Lord over the entire universe. We
cannot carry this over to the sphere of politics, because in politics the
sovereign are rulers, who are men. If we attempt to apply this verse to
politics, the situation will arise where certain people claiming to speak in
the name of God (i.e. a clerical class) lay claim to rulership. But this is
precluded by the Prophetic saying above.

We thus see that neither the history of Islam,
nor the present state of Islamic countries, nor indeed the example of Iran, can
shed light on the relationship between Islam and democracy.

Council

In the Koran, verses dealing with Shura (council, or counsel) occur in two
places. The first of these is: “Counsel among yourselves in your tasks”
(3:159), and the second is: “They carry out their tasks by counseling [or:
councils] among themselves” (42:38). It should also be pointed out that the
second verse is important enough to justify naming the chapter it occurs in as
“Council”.

The meaning of shura is “assembly, gathering, consultation.” Mashwarah (consultation, council) and mushawir (consultant) are derived from the same Arabic root. Thus,
it has been emphasized that consultation is a good thing in the most general
sense. This is illustrated by the Prophet’s life, who always consulted his
compatriots before reaching a decision. Applying this to the political sphere,
the rule of parliament and public vote and, more generally, democracy, is
implicitly approved by Islam. The greatest council and counsel are nationwide
elections in which the entire community participates. In the history of Islam,
of course, “council” has seldom meant polling the people. The first Caliphs
were, for example, chosen by “consultative committees” composed of a few
members. In later times, rulers availed themselves of councils formed by
specialists. This is an approach that survives today in democratic countries in
the form of various commissions, reducing the possibility of error in the
decision of a single man reached on the basis of incomplete knowledge.

Holy Law

People have laws in order to regulate social
affairs: i.e., relationships between individuals. If human beings were angels,
there would be no need for laws, because everybody would act in an ideal
fashion anyway. Since this is not the case, however, we have, not simply law,
but law enforcement.

There are two considerations in framing laws. The
first is punishment, for those who have broken a specific law, since a crime
cannot be allowed to pass unnoticed, and the victim has a right to justice by
which the crime, if not undone, can at least be redressed.

But equally, and perhaps more importantly, laws
exist for prevention and deterrence—in order to discourage people from an
undesired act in the first place.

Some of the rulings of the Holy Law which have
attracted attention in the West need to be viewed in this light. Certain
Koranic injunctions may appear to be unduly severe when judged by modern
standards, yet it should be rememebered that they are there for deterrence, not
merely punishment. Prevention is intended much more than implementation, as a
proper reading in the due context will reveal. The following well-known saying
harbors a profound truth that is relevant here: An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Many of the accusations that Islam is
undemocratic and totalitarian follow from the misperception that it introduces
strictures leaving very little scope for free activity in almost all fields of
life. The mistake here stems from a misunderstanding of the basic concepts
involved.

It is usually ignored that the word shariah, or “Holy Law”, is used in our
day in two different senses. The first of these is the religious principles to
be observed by a Moslem, such as perfoming the Prayer, abstinence from alcohol,
etc. All this rests on individual decision in any case, so no one else can
interfere. The second meaning in which the word is used is Islamic
jurisprudence, or fiqh. Within this
scope it is expected to regulate social relationships. (An interesting
sidelight is that those who uphold the Holy Law usually mean the first sense,
whereas those who deride it usually mean the second, so that although both
groups use the same word, the senses in which they intend it almost never
coincide.)

Holy Law in the sense of religious
jurisprudence is, first of all, a legal system. This means that it concerns
itself with whatever activities or fields of life any system of laws would address. In other words, the Holy Law
deals with exactly those areas which any legal code has to. On this basis,
then, the Holy Law is neither more nor less totalitarian than any Law in any
country.

What distinguishes Holy Law from other codes is
that it is based, as far as is possible, on the orders of God (the Koran) and
the example of the Prophet (the Way). But these can, by themselves, constitute
only a foundation for a legal code. It is estimated that the verses in the
Koran dealing with legal matters number between 200 and 400 (the estimate
varies according to the specialist and the assumptions and definitions he works
from.) Even the simplest society cannot be ruled by so few injunctions; in
modern, complex societies, thousands of regulations are required. For this
reason, the rules of the Holy Law have in every age been framed by Islamic
legislators. The Koran and the Way only describe the broad outlines. The
details are left to the legists. Not only is there no obstacle to deriving
specific principles suitable to a certain time and place from general,
universal ones, there is also a necessity. For a choice that is appropriate in
one situation may not be so in another.

It is also true, on the other hand, that not
everything can be changed. Regulations may change with time, but there are
rules that don’t. If we compare religious Law to a tree, the verses of the
Koran are its roots, authentic Traditions (of the Prophet) are its trunk, the
Four Schools of Law are its main branches, and sundry regulations are its
leaves. This tree can always sprout new branches and leaves. But to attack its
roots and its trunk are tantamount to slaughtering it. Otherwise, permission
has already been given in the Koran for deriving (istinbat)new rules
(4:83).

We thus see that the Holy Law does not differ
from other codes as far as being made by human intervention is concerned, and
that it covers the same ground as they do. As for its unchanging parts: do not
all codes possess certain fundamental assumptions, which remain inviolate and
invariant as a particular legislation unfolds? (On this, see Appendix A.)

According to Malise Ruthven, who has done
in-depth research on the subject, only 600 of the more than 6000 verses in the
Koran have to do with legal responsibilities. Most of these, in turn, deal with
religious obligations like Ritual Prayer, Fasting and Pilgrimage. The number of
verses dealing directly with legal matters is only about 80, and most of these,
again, are concerned with women, marriage and inheritance.

Professor Ruthven, having subjected Islamic Law
to a thorough-going investigation, states in his book Islam in the World:

Whereas
Christianity inherited a body of secular law developed under the pagan Romans,
Islam developed a system of religious law more or less independently of the
political sphere... Far from being integrated (as many Muslims claim), the
political and religious institutions remained distinct.[32]

Ruthven continues:

Society
existed more or less independently of the state, a feature which is still
evident in the Muslim world of today.[33]

... the fiqh
is less a system of law, with a developed apparatus of procedure and
enforcement, than a process of socialization and acculturation... In time...
observance of the divine law becomes a social factor functioning more or less
independently of the state...

...the caliphs
took over and adapted much of the criminal, commercial and constitutional law
of their Byzantine and Sassanid predecessors...

The qadis
(Shari’a judges) had no power to enforce legal decisions on the rulers. The
rulers, while formally committed to upholding the Shari’a, were rarely prepared
to submit to the decisions of the qadis....
if such decisions... went against their interests.[34]

Thus, while in the realm of personal or family
matters the Shari’a could be implemented on the basis of doctrines elaborated
by the faqihs [exponents of fiqh ], in [almost all other matters]
power of decision remained with the rulers, who governed by decree and settled
disputes through their own mazalim
(complaints) courts. Thus state institutions grew up parallel to Islamic ones,
leading to a de facto separation of
the religious and secular spheres...[35]

Ruthven also draws attention to the fact that
the “divine right” of kings, prevalent in the West, has no place in Islam. In
the face of this right to rule, which can be traced to the Christian Church, it
was necessary to develop the concept of the “natural rights” of the individual,
and Western politics and law reached its present state from such origins. In
Islam, on the other hand, there never was such a problem to begin with.

All this proves that The Holy Law has seen a
restricted application in Islamic societies and was buttressed by many external
factors. This is the result of situations met with in real life. For this
reason, it would be totally incorrect to view the Holy Law as a seamless
monolith that governs society down to the tiniest detail and oppresses it with
an iron fist. Far from being the state’s instrument of repression, The Holy Law
is an institution that has been adopted and developed by civil society
independently of, and sometimes even in opposition to, the state.

As for
the enforcement of the Holy Law by some present-day police states in a bitterly
cruel way, this stems from their desire to gain some popularity, at least, and
to render themselves partially palatable by appearing “Islamic” in the eyes of
their subject peoples. Their coercion and cruelty has nothing to do with the
Holy Law, which has been applied leniently throughout most of Islam’s fourteen
centuries, but is due to their individual constitutions and legal codes. These
are not the Holy Law itself, but barbarian interpretations and monstrous
caricatures thereof. When one looks at the so-called “Islamic” present-day
police states, indiscriminately chopping off hands right and left, one has to
remember that hand severance was unheard of in the Ottoman Empire, extending
over 20 million square kilometers and millions of people, in all 600 years of
its rule. Claims to the contrary notwithstanding, it can be flatly stated that
no Islamic state exists in the world today. Since a clear-headed investigation
reveals this to be so, we should stop laying the blame at Islam’s doorstep for
the antics of every Tom, Dick or Saddam who comes along.

Islam and Terrorism

Even the thought of terrorism is anathema to
Islam, the very name of which is derived from the Arabic root for “peace”.
“Islamic terrorism” is as plausible—to borrow Leszek Kolakowski’s term—as
“fried snowballs”. The very name of Islam has stood for justice for more than
fourteen centuries. And nothing can be more unjust than the premeditated
slaughter of innocent civilians for grievances caused by other parties, which
is what terrorism is all about. Even when the cause is just, a fair trial and
due procedure of law is what Islam requires.

There is a widespread attempt in the media to
create an image where terrorism is associated with Islam. Against this, one can
only protest that this is not what Islam stands for, and that far from
condoning terrorist acts, Islam’s most severe punishments are reserved for
those who foment discord and strife. Anyone in Islamic countries unfortunate,
angry, or misguided enough to resort to terrorist acts had better be aware of
this fact.

Islam and Slavery

A slave is a person who has no rights. His
master can use him as he desires. In world history, slavery has emerged from
the problem of what to do with prisoners of war.

Those who consider Islam to be inherently
undemocratic could conceivably wish to mount an argument on the basis of
slavery.

It is true that Islam made no direct attempt to
abolish slavery. But it did take steps to improve the lot of slaves, and to
abolish slavery in time. Freeing a slave was prescribed as an atonement for
many sins. Ill treatment of slaves was prohibited. In the Farewell Sermon of
the Prophet, delivered during his Farewell Pilgrimage and considered by many to
be the first “Declaration of Human Rights,” the subject is handled as follows:
“As for slaves: give them the same food that you eat and clothe them as you
yourself dress. If they make a mistake you cannot forgive, separate from them.
They, too, are God’s servants and do not deserve ill treatment.”

Slaves have become commanders, even rulers, in
Islamic countries and have enjoyed more authority than free people. The
legalizing precedent has again been given in the Farewell Sermon: “If a
crippled black slave becomes your ruler, obey him and follow him so long as he
governs you in accordance with the Koran.”

Slavery is a social disease that has proved
astonishingly difficult to eradicate. According to Newsweek magazine (May 4, 1992), there are still an estimated 100
million slaves in the world. This is the reason why Islam did not attempt to
abolish slavery openly from the start. Slavery is not an institution that was
introduced by Islam. Having found slavery already in existence, however, Islam
took measures to abolish it within time, since it was impossible to do so
immediately by sudden decree.

But if we attempt to oppose Islam or brand it
as undemocratic because it failed to abolish slavery, we shall find ourselves
in a very difficult position. The city-state of Athens in the past and the
United States of America in our age are the arch-examples, even the prototypes,
of democracy. Yet, as Tocqueville points out:

In Athens... there were only twenty thousand citizens in
a population of over three hundred and fifty thousand. All the rest were
slaves...

Athens, then, with her universal
suffrage, was no more than an aristocratic republic in which all the nobles had
an equal right to government.[36]

In other words Athens, the “cradle of
democracy,” was actually a society based on slavery. As for America, it is famous
for having enslaved millions of black Africans, and has been able to extricate
itself from this situation only in the last century by the device of a very
bloody civil war. It cannot be claimed even today that the problem of racism
has been adequately resolved in the United States. In our age, when South
Africa is only just winning its struggle against apartheid (pronounced
“apart-hate”), Islam cannot be called to account for not having abolished
slavery 1400 years ago.

In fact, it is only thanks to the development
of machines which can perform man’s drudgery for him that slavery has been
pushed into the background in modern society. Slavery, and even manual work,
has diminished to the extent that slaves and workers have been replaced by
machines. It is the machine, rather than significant moral advancement, that
has freed man from the drudgery of many kinds of work.

Take away the mechanical infrastructure of
industry, and it would not be surprising at all to observe, even today, the
re-emergence of slavery. Nor is such a prospect as remote as it sounds. With
the depletion of oil and other fossil fuels, on which our civilization depends
so much but is in the process of squandering, it is not hard to imagine vast
tracts of machinery that would become useless and abandoned in the future. We
should thank the fruits of scientific progress and technological civilization
for the present-day absence of slavery, and be more concerned about our own
future when it may be reinstituted. Global precautions should be taken to
prevent the future resurgence of slavery.

Islam and Racism

Islam is certainly not racist. It has done away
with racism 14 centuries ago to an extent unmatched even by contemporary
Western societies, and thus demolished the notion: “he and I are different,”
which serves as one of the basic tenets of slavery. Here, again, it will
suffice to quote a sentence from the Farewell Sermon:

“Just as no Arab has any superiority to any
non-Arab and vice versa, blacks have no superiority to whites, nor whites to blacks.”

“God,” says the Koran, “commands you to judge
with justice when you judge among human beings” (4:58). “Among human beings”
here covers both Moslems and non-Moslems. Islam, therefore, desires that all
human beings be treated equally regardless of color, religion, language, race,
and social, economic or political status. It advocates the equality of all
before the law. Violations in practice cannot invalidate this principle.

Is Islam Totalitarian?

Another misunderstanding surrounds the use of
the word “totalitarian.” A totalitarian regime is not merely one of
bloodstained oppression. Totalitarian rule gives all the rights to the state,
and no liberties to the individual:

1.It attempts to restructure the whole
society according to a certain ideology or system of beliefs, and aims to
control even the thoughts of individuals.

2.It liquidates all individuals who do not
belong to, are opposed to or are at variance with it.

If we evaluate Islam in the light of these two
distinguishing characteristics, we find that it is impossible to identify Islam
with totalitarianism, with the exception, perhaps, of Iran, which is
geographically and historically marginal.[37]

1. One of the major distinctions between Islam
and other religions is its principle: “There can be no compulsion in religion.”
This principle is guaranteed by its place in the Koran (2:256) and cannot be
violated. Islam can only use the way of gentle persuasion, and appeals to the
intellect and comprehension of those it addresses. That force cannot yield
desirable results is a well-known fact in Islam.

Renunciation of the use of force is not
confined only to non-Moslems. It is up to the individual Moslem to decide how
faithfully he will abide by religious rules. If a Moslem insists on not
performing the Prayer, for example, he does only himself harm. He may be gently
reminded, but he cannot be coerced. It is only when the rights of another are
infringed that the Holy Law—like, indeed, all laws—comes into question. What is
said here applies, of course, to places and situations where the Holy Law is
properly in effect, which is to say almost nowhere in the world today.

2. There have always been people who would not
be persuaded by Islam. The true nature of a system or regime emerges in how it
deals with the dissidents and minorities under its rule. Islam has passed this
test with flying colors in all ages. Every right has been granted and respect
shown to people belonging to other religions. A minor proof of this is the
gratitude celebrations of the Jews, 500 years after they escaped from the
tortures of the Inquisition into the arms of the Ottoman Empire in 1492.

Indeed, there have been periods in history when
the Ottoman Empire was the sole superpower in the world. If the Ottomans had
pursued a policy of Islamization or extermination in those days, there would
have been no religion other than Islam in the world today.

In Islam, everyone is the servant of God. A
person who has properly understood Islam knows that to dominate and coerce
another is to elevate oneself to the status of a god, and shuns this like the
plague. The rules of law and not the commands of individuals are the basis in
Islam, and the requirements of Law are carried out. For no society can function
without the proper application of law. As evidenced by the Ottoman Code of
laws, even the Sultans were bound by the law and subject to it.

Wherever there has been arbitrary rule, this
has not occurred because of Islam but in spite of it. On the other hand,
Islamic law permits the coexistence of other legal systems alongside it, as is
seen, for example, in the last period of the Ottomans.

All of which leads us to another point: Some
people are currently in search of a religion, or “meta-religion”, that accepts
all religions and tolerates them. But Islam accepts all religions “of the Book”
that have gone before it, venerates their prophets, and views them with
tolerance. Hence, the meta-religion eagerly sought by some already exists, and
goes by the name of “Islam”.

(The dangers of totalitarianism are further
discussed in Appendix B.)

The Views of a Specialist

It may be useful, at this point, to refer to
the views of an expert. In such a case, it is preferable that this specialist
be a Western non-Moslem who has not refrained from criticizing Islam on other
counts. Bernard Lewis is such an orientalist and historian of Islam. Professor
Lewis has, in his notable study, The
Political Language of Islam (1988), brought a wide perspective to the
subject.

Professor Lewis makes it unmistakably clear
that Islam is neither theocratic nor dictatorial: “Islam is clearly not... a
theocracy.”[38]
“There is even less foundation for the portrayal of Islamic government as a
system in wich the ruler is an all-powerful despot and the subject his helpless
slave, entirely at his mercy. This picture is false in both theory and
practice.” In Islam, the ruler has no power of legislation, but finds it ready
for him in the form of religious law in those matters which fall within its
domain. “The ruler’s duty is to defend and uphold, to maintain and enforce, the
law, by which he himself is bound no less than the humblest of his subjects.”[39]
In this sense, Islam upholds the rule of law.

The respected French periodical, Le Nouvel Observateur, conducted an
interview with Professor Lewis on the occasion of the publication of his book.
His words there are even more enlightening:

When we in the West attempt to separate good government
from bad government and despotism from democracy, we immediately take freedom
as a measure. The Moslems, however, take justice. When we say ‘freedom’, we
think of the subject, and mean and indicate his rights before the government.
Traditional Islam means the same thing when it says ‘justice’. But it places
the burden on the ruler’s shoulders. What is for us a right belonging to the
subjects is, for it, a duty belonging to the sovereign. In general terms, Islam
emerges as a system of duties rather than of rights. Of course, justice is not
the same thing as freedom. But it can lead to the same results.

What I am saying
is that Islam does not conflict with democracy; it even shows the way leading
to the latter.

In other words, Islam
places on the ruler as a legal duty the recognition of rights won by people in
the West only after long struggle. We know that historical practice has been at
variance with this, but that is not the fault of Islam. Democracy can survive
only when it is secured by laws, just as Islam requires.

Separation of Powers

In contemporary democracies, the principle of
“separation of powers” has been introduced as a counterbalance against the
possibility that power should become concentrated in a few hands, these three
estates being the executive, the legislative and the judiciary.

A similar separation is also found in Islam.
Long before Montesquieu introduced the separation of powers, the caliph Haroun
al-Rasheed applied it by separating the judiciary and appointing Abu Yousseff
as its head. In Islam, executive power is in the hands of the caliph or sultan.
Legislation belongs to the ulama, or
learned doctors—over whom presided, in the case of the Ottomans, the “Sheikh of
Islam.” As for the judiciary, this is in the hands of the qadis, or judges, represented by a chief judge. The principle of
“separation of powers” is not explicitly stated, but the practice conforms or
is close to it. For example, a sultan could not easily fire a Sheikh of Islam,
yet the latter had the power to depose a sultan.

Women’s Rights

Before leaving this discussion of Holy Law, it
will be well to touch very briefly on the subject of women’s rights. This is a
subject that has been constantly abused, and most often only one view has been
aired. Limitations of space preclude the kind of in-depth treatment that the
subject really deserves. Suffice it to say here that contrary to widespread
opinion in the West, women have enjoyed more rights in Islamic than in some
Western countries up to—and sometimes into—the twentieth century. As the
prestigious British journal, The
Economist, notes, “The Koran is better about women than is generally
realized... the two [man and woman] were born equal, ‘from a single soul’.”[40]
Any legal differences between male and female stem not from inequality, but
from biological differences, for the two were created biologically
complementary to each other. To judge them by the same rules would be to
infringe the God-given rights of either the one or the other. Again, historical
malpractice can be used to condemn those who have perpetrated it, but certainly
not Islam itself. Let the same source have the final word: “...at bottom such
things do not happen to Muslim women because of what either the Koran or the
Prophet said... They happen because of the pre-existing habits of the people
among whom Islam first took root...” (Blaming matters on the scholars of Islam
neglects the fact that they too were members of these same societies, thus
either sharing the same mindset as their fellow countrymen or else being forced
to take that mindset into consideration, and so this explanation reduces to
that given in the quotation.)

Religion is a Necessity for Democracy

We now come to the question: is religion, in
general, a desirable thing for democracy, or is it an undesirable one?

The two volumes of Democracy in America, written by the famous lawyer and thinker
Alexis de Tocqueville and published consecutively in 1835 and 1840, constitute
a peak that has yet to be matched concerning democracy and its practice in
America.

Here is how Tocqueville evaluates the
relationship between democracy and religion: “In the United States it is not
only mores that are controlled by religion [Christianity], but its sway extends
even over reason.”[41]

After
pointing out that religion introduces certain moral/ethical principles and
various restrictions, Tocquville continues: “So the human spirit never sees an
unlimited field before itself; however bold it is, from time to time it feels
that it must halt before insurmountable barriers... Thus, while the law allows
the American people to do everything, there are things which religion prevents
them from doing and forbids them to dare.”[42]

Tocqueville criticizes those who attack
religion in the name of freedom:

Despotism may be able to do without
faith, but freedom cannot. Religion is much more needed in the republic they
advocate than in the monarchy they attack, and in democratic republics most of
all. How can society escape destruction if, when political ties are relaxed,
moral ties are not tightened?[43]

Saying: “Religion having lost its sway over
men’s souls, the clearest line dividing good from ill has been obliterated;
everything in the moral world seems uncertain”,[44]
Tocqueville points out that the loss of religion will lead to the loss of
freedom.[45]
(See Appendix B.)

Atheism Means Cruelty and Tyranny

But Tocqueville was not the only genius living in
the 19th century to perceive certain truths. Two other men of genius were able
to foresee the social catastrophes of the 20th century: the Russian novelist
Fyodor Dostoevsky and the German philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche.

But why was Tocqueville right? Because, in the
final analysis, God is the source of all ethics. It is God who commands human
beings: “Do this, this is right,” or: “Don’t do that, that is wrong.” But that
is not all. God is also the sole enforcer of ethics. For God has also said: “If
you do this, I will reward you; if you do that, I will punish you.” Where there
is no belief in God, fear of God also collapses. Thus, both the definition (or
delimitation) of ethics and its
sanction are removed. This means that if belief in God ceases to exist, so does
the basis of ethics and morality, and humanity is set adrift on a sea of moral
relativity. And once morality is out of the way, man loses all his human
attributes, becoming an animal and even a monster. With the removal of ethics
from society, not only does the crime rate begin to climb, but the nature of
crime itself becomes increasingly savage. In short, once man has taken leave of
God, his humanity takes leave of man.

One of those to perceive this most clearly was
Dostoevsky. Better than any sociologist or political scientist, Dostoevsky
points to a polarization that occurs in society once man is shorn of faith,
leaving two kinds of creature. One of these is the man-god (or despot), and the
other is the herd (or slaves).

In The
Devils, Kirilov says: “If there is no God, then I am God.” Man, having lost
his faith, can find no being superior to him when he surveys the universe.
(This is only to be expected, since God has created man as the highest of all
creatures.) As a result, man’s lower, base self—or, in Sufic terminology, his
egotistical “Impelling[46]
Self”—declares itself god. But this is exactly what Nimrod did when he told
Abraham: “I give life and make to die,” or Pharaoh when he told his people: “I
am indeed your truest Lord” (79:24). As for the pharaohs of the twentieth
century, they have done things from which even a Nimrod or Pharaoh might have
recoiled in horror.

Once man has lost his faith in God, the
“deified man” or “strong man” takes the place that rightfully belongs to God.
(This is called Tagut in the Koran,
which means deified man who lays claim to Lordship.) The base self becomes the
usurper of God’s office. Might alone any longer makes right. Shorn of all
values, having repudiated God and religion, morality and compassion, the
man-god loves—is even obsessed with—only two things: power and sex. It is
inevitable that all human qualities must disappear from the man-god, who is a
creature of his ego and hence, of Satan. Where faith in God does not exist,
man, too, ceases to do so.

But Dostoevsky also foresaw Nietzsche, who is
the author of such propositions as: “God is dead, we have killed Him.” (Since
God is immortal, of course, what had actually died was people’s faith in Him.)
Nietzsche, in turn, foresaw the emergence of the “superman”. For the superman,
human qualities were things to be ashamed of. Nietzsche said he was “cruel” and
“beyond good and evil,” which placed him in the territory of absolute evil,
since he had already transcended morality. (It can be seen that Nietzshe’s
superman possesses qualities diametrically opposed to those of the Perfect Man
in Islamic Sufism. On the other hand, Nietzsche was perhaps the first to
prophesy—in Thus Spoke Zarathustra—the
coming dangers of the “monster state.”)

Another of Dostoyevsky’s characters expresses
this as follows: “If God does not exist, everything is permitted.” The
tyrannies of our century have amply demonstrated, by their blood-curdling
cruelties, just what these “permitted” things are. For this reason, it is
necessary to study the history of the 20th century with the utmost care.

Dostoyevsky’s greatest discovery, the “Grand
Inquisitor,” is another example of Nietzsche’s superman, and highlights another
fact: if coercion and torture coexist in a place with religion, there the faith
of God has departed from hearts, and remains an empty claim mindlessly mouthed
in words devoid of content.

The second of Dostoevsky’s social classes is
the herd, composed of slaves. If man does not have an immortal soul, if there
is no reward and punishment, if anyone can get away with anything, then it
becomes permissible to subject him to every manner of indignity and insult.
Unfortunately, our century has done nothing but justify Dostoevsky’s and
Nietzsche’s prototypes of herd and superman.

If there is no morality, there can be no
justice. As long as morality exists, right makes might. He who is right is
powerful, and justice rules. But once morality is gone, might makes right, and
justice disappears along with ethics.

The conclusion, then, is that where there is no
faith in God, neither can morality exist. Where there is no morality,
everything is permitted. Where there is no morality, there is no man—there are
only the superhuman few and the subhuman, even the subanimal, herd. In short,
where religion and faith in God do not exist, not only do the most horrifying
nightmares come true, but they also all befall us, every single one of them.

The Tyranny of the Majority and Human Rights

Tocqueville, who inspected democracy under a
magnifying glass, claims that it can lead to a “tyranny of the majority”.
Although he does not himself give any examples, we know that the Greek
democracies of Antiquity operated in this way.

A “theory of human rights” emerged in the 17th
century in the West, led by Thomas Hobbes and, especially, John Locke. This
notion found expression in the unwritten assumptions of the British
Constitution and in the provisions of the American Bill of Rights.

In the conception of democracy which followed,
the principle of majority rule is a necessary condition for democracy (the
“rule of the people”), but not a sufficient one. The will of the majority
enjoys legitimacy only if it is an expression of “freely given consent.”
Secondly and more importantly, certain inviolable rights and freedoms are
defined that are granted to everyone. Majorities can do everything except
deprive minorities of their rights and freedoms, such as speech, press,
assembly, etc. Minorities, in turn, must abide by the rules and procedures of
democratic organization. (Certain institutions are also necessary, such as an
impartial and independent judiciary, a free but responsible press, and a
military under civilian control.)

Democratic government is one in which the
minority, or its representatives, can peacefully become the majority or its
representatives. Again, democracy is, as Karl Popper pointed out, the only
practical and peaceful method that has been found by which the people can oust
an unwanted government from power.

This does not mean that democracy is paradise.
There, too, there are problems and headaches. In Winston Churchill’s words,
“Democracy is the worst possible form of government—except for all those other
forms that have been tried.”

Actually, forms of government can be reduced to
three: Tyranny, where society obeys one man (monarchies and dictatorships);
democracy, where government is in the service of the people; and anarchy, which
is an absence or void of government and, as Sidney Hook rightly observes, “is
the rule of a thousand tyrants.” It is because anarchy can be even worse than
despotism that the Koran remarks: “Obey those in authority among you” (4:59).[47]

What do we find when we look at Islam in terms
of minority rights and liberties? When the Prophet of God migrated to Medina,
he prepared a document with the Medinans that is the first written constitution
in the world. In this “Constitution of Medina,” the concept of religious
community is defined as a political union that encompasses the whole people.
This includes the Jews and even the polytheists and idolaters. Every group,
according to the Medina Constitution, is autonomous in the fields of religion
and law. All parties signed this social contract of their own free will. The
Medina Constitution, as a legal document, leaves all groups free to practice
their religion and lead their lives, except for the unavoidable regulations
needed in mutual life. Those who do not accept Islam are not bound by its
rules.

One of the articles of this document explicitly
states: “The Jews... shall possess equal rights with us.” Thus, “equality” and
“rights” found expression in Islam a thousand years before they began to be
articulated in the modern democracies of the West. The Prophet also signed a
similar document with the Christians of Najran.

It can be seen that in spirit, the Medina
Constitution is pluralist, libertarian, respectful of the law and of minority
rights. The definition of community given therein corresponds to the concept of
“people” in democracies. That Moslems should be in the majority, therefore,
does not give them the right to force their views upon minorities. This is
prevented by the precedent and example of the Prophet of Islam himself. And
indeed, Islamic history corroborates this in terms of respect for minorities.

It may be appropriate at this point to dwell
upon two major deficiencies of democracy:

1.Democracies have not always been able to
judge correctly where to draw the line on freedoms. For example, American
democracy has caused a great increase in the crime rate by allowing its citizens
the right to bear arms. And in general, children have become rebellious towards
their parents, this undesirable situation being confused with democracy.

2.One-party (“monist”) democracy of the kind
extant in Japan has been looked down upon, and the multi-party (“pluralist”)
kind has been preferred. Yet here, too, a drawback presents itself, for
different parties have not shrunk from pitting brother against brother and
husband against wife for the ulterior cause of coming to power. (Furthermore,
the views of different parties have not always been very different.) That the
struggle for power should create enmities within society is a problem
associated with multi-party democracy, and it is not yet clear how it is to be
satisfactorily resolved within the democratic system.

Organization of the Islamic Community

In an article published in August 1994 in Britain’s respected
daily The Independent, Keith Ward,
Professor of Theology at Oxford University, stated that Islam was the most democratic
religion in the world today because it did not possess a priestly hierarchy
like Christianity, and because its central doctrinal authority was
unstructured.

The organization of the religious community has
taken on different shapes in different religions. In Catholicism, for instance,
the Christian community is organized in the form of a government—it is a
well-known fact that the leaders of the early Church took the Roman Empire’s
political institutions as their model. The Emperor of this government is the
Pope, its senators are the Cardinals, and its governors are the Bishops.

The formation of the Moslem community, on the
other hand, has evolved not in the shape of a government, but in the form of a
university. This is why the central religious organization has been called madrasa (school) in Islam, whereas it is
called ecclesia (Church) in
Christianity. There is no clerical class or spiritual hegemony in Islam; there
are only mudarris es (teachers or
professors).

Islam is based on the principles of freedom,
reason, and the intellect. The teachers do not force truth on anyone without
convincing them by rational proofs. There is no compulsion in Islam. It is
essential to believe and have faith rationally.

The scholars in the schools have solemnly vowed
to guide the whole of society to the truth, and have dedicated themselves to
its salvation. The activities of the schools are geared to the entire society.
The “spiritual schools” (tariqas), on
the other hand, give a more specialized training for those with spiritual
aspirations. Because such people are the exception rather than the rule,
however, Sunnite Islam is composed of a union of schools, not an association of
dervish convents (taqqas).

The whole of Islamdom has lived as one great university.
With the Ottomans, the Sheikh of Islam was the director of this university. As
for the leaders of the law schools and the sheikhs of the spiritual schools,
these are the equivalent of scholars with doctrines. As can be seen from all
this, the religion of Islam is based on the authority of science or knowledge,
not on an administrative authority.

Why are Human Beings Equal?

Up to this point, we have seen that religion is
a necessity, even a sine qua non, for
democracy, that atheism leads to sociopolitical disaster, and that Islam as a
religion accomodates democracy. Normally, this would be the point to bid the
reader farewell. The really significant part, however, still remains to be
said. From this point of view, what has been said above is merely a prelude to
or infrastructure for what follows.

Democracy is based on the equality of men.
Where the equality of human beings and their votes do not hold, there democracy
cannot be said to exist.

Many things have been said about equality
throughout history. Rather than add to or reiterate these arguments, it is
better to state the end result and continue from there. Since we find human
beings to be grossly unequal and different in nature rather than equal, right
down to their fingerprints, what is meant by “equality” is equality before the law. This is the sense in which the term is
used in the Declaration of Human Rights of 1789, which championed the formula:
“Liberty, equality, fraternity.” In earlier times, the Greeks expressed
equality before the law by a single word, isonomia.

Now this brings us to the basic question that
needs to be asked: why are human beings equal at all, whether before the law or
not? Why is the basic assertion of oppression, racism and slavery, “I am
superior to you,” invalid? From what root do all the social and political ideas
lying at the base of democracy derive their strength?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

The first article of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, which was adopted by the United Nations in 1948 and lies at
the basis of such legal documents as the Helsinki Final Accords, is as follows:

“1. All human beings are born free and equal
in dignity and rights.”

The Declaration continues with the
generalizations “everyone” and “no one,” which go on to the end:

“3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of
person.”

“4. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude,” etc.

In fact, it is erroneous even to call these
generalizations, for they are universally applicable without exception.

In the Preamble of the Declaration, mention is
made of “the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family”,
and of “faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the
human person and in the equal rights of men and women”.

But hold on. What has “faith” got to do with
it? This is an unexpected term. What is the word “faith” doing in a universal
legal declaration? And since faith is obviously involved in some way, could
this have anything to do with religion, the traditional repository of faith?

Declaration of the Rights of Man and the
Citizen:

The United Nations Universal Declaration is
based on the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen of 1789.
Many of its articles have been taken with little or no change from that source.
Here is the first article of the French Declaration:

“1. Men are born and remain free and equal
in rights.”

The preamble of this declaration states: “the
natural, inalienable and sacred rights of man”.

Everyone knows that people possess certain
inalienable, inviolable and untransferable rights. But in what context does the
word “sacred” occur?

The Declaration of Independence:

The French Declaration was inspired by the
Virginia Bill of Rights. This in turn finds its root in the American
Declaration of Independence of 1776. The very first sentence of the main text
of the Declaration of Independence reads:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit
of Happiness.”

Now it is not by any
means self-evident that all men are created equal. We have grown accustomed to
accepting this a priori without
questioning it. But if you ask a racist, for example, he will think that the
notion: “I am superior to him”[48]
is equally, if not more, self-evident. He may even say: “Are you blind? What
can be more obvious than the difference in our skin colors?”

To put it in more general terms, how are we to
explain to a discriminator that all men are equal, even one, beyond superficial
differences such as size, weight, color, etc.? What is to be our foundation?

But mention is also made here of a “Creator”.

The American Declaration of Independence gives
expression not merely to “faith” and the “sacred”, but states that there is a
Creator, that human beings have been brought into existence by Him, and that
their rights have been given to them by
their Creator.

It can
be seen that as one probes deeper into the past, things become both clearer and
more interesting. The final recourse of human rights in the Declaration of
Independence is the Creator. Words have taken a long and winding route, finally
ending up in the domain of religion.

Can support be found, then, for equality in
terms of basic rights and freedoms in religions?

Robert A. Dahl, one of the leading exponents of
democratic theory in our day and Professor Emeritus at Yale University, puts it
this way:

Yet democracy
might, like Plato’s republic, be little more than a philosophical fantasy were
it not for the persistent and widespread influence of the belief that human
beings are intrinsically equal in a fundamental way—or at any rate some
substantial group of human beings are. Historically, the idea of intrinsic
equality gained much of its strength, particularly in Europe and the
English-speaking countries, from the common doctrine of Judaism and
Christianity (shared also by Islam) that we are equally God’s children [or
servants]. Indeed it was exactly on this belief that Locke grounded his
assertion of the natural equality of all persons in a state of nature.[49]

Democracy in Polytheistic Societies

Although they developed the first examples of
democracy because of their high regard for man, the Greek democracies proved
unsuccessful in the end. First of all, these were slave societies, i.e. there
was a distinction between free citizens and those deprived of political rights
(slaves). Second, election results were viewed almost as a military victory,
and the vanquished were reduced to the status of, if not slaves, at least
second-class citizens. This resulted in a tripartite class structure within
society, which led to bloody rebellions and frequently the emergence of a
tyrant. Because minority rights were disregarded, these were not democracies in
the modern sense of the word. Such problems had a great bearing on Plato’s
criticisms of democracy.

We here bear witness to the coexistence of
inequality and polytheism (associationism). It was Tocqueville, again, who
first drew attention to this fact. Almost a century and a half before the
Shi’ite sociologist Ali Shariati spoke of a “sociology of associationism,”
Tocqueville was saying: “... when men are isolated from one another by great
differences, they easily discover as many divinities as there are nations,
castes, classes, and families, and they find a thousand private roads to go to
heaven.” On the other hand: “Men who are alike and on the same level in this
world easily conceive the idea of a single God who imposes the same laws on
each man and grants him future happiness at the same price. The conception of
the unity of mankind ever brings them back to the idea of the unity of the
Creator...”[50]
Note that this can also work in the opposite direction: polytheism can lead to
discrimination and inequality between human beings. The notion: “Your god is
different from my god” is a basic pretext for thinking that a person is
different from us, and even for not considering him human at all. (Incomprehensibly,
this accusation has from time to time been levelled by Christians at Moslems,
in spite of the fact that both religions believe in one God.) In such a case,
human rights cannot be applied to everyone. One of the important reasons, then,
why modern democracies have succeeded where those in Antiquity failed, is that
the latter were polytheistic while the former are monotheistic. For Europe and
America are firmly based in the Judaeo-Christian tradition.

Man in the Bible

We can now begin to discuss the implications of
Gilbert Keith Chesterton’s 1922 remark: “There is no basis for democracy except
in a dogma about the divine origin of Man.”

Right at the beginning of the Old Testament,
the following statement is repeated three times: “God created Man (Adam) in His
own image” (Genesis, 1:26-7).

This is an expression of equality. As historian
Paul Johnson has observed,[51]
it is not simply Adam or the human race that has been created in the image of
God; each individual human being has been created in His image. (Note that we
are not here trying to unravel the true meaning of the statement: we are not
interested in what “God’s image” means, but are investigating the possible
outcomes of this statement.)

In this sense, all men are equal, because they
all have been created in the same image, the same form. “All Israelites,” says
Johnson, “are equal before God, and therefore equal before his law.”[52]

We find here the first application of equality,
which is the basic principle of democracy: “As men are all equally made in
God’s image, they have equal rights in any fundamental sense. It is no accident
that slavery among the Jews disappeared during the Second Commonwealth...”[53]

Jesus, who came after Moses, tried to have
everyone love and respect one another with the principle of love that he
brought.

Judaism is the religion of rules. Christianity
is the religion of love. Islam, with its unique synthesis of rules and love, is
the full bloom and culmination of religion. Again, Judaism deals more with the
material world, Christianity with the spiritual world. Islam, which combines
materiality with spirituality, stands at the summit of religious thought and
experience, offering man the best of both worlds.

On the other hand, Jews believe that they are
the “Chosen People of God,” that they are “a nation of priests,” and that God
intends to guide humanity through them. They see themselves—if this is the
right expression—as the “clergy” or “Church” of mankind, and consider
themselves the elite of the human race.

In Christianity, as everyone knows, the
Faithful are divided into the the Church or priestly class (clergy) and the
ordinary believers (laity). In Christianity the true chosen of humanity is the
Church, or the community of priests. The Church has the authority to speak in
the name of God and to excommunicate. It thus possesses absolute authority over
a person’s afterlife (and, in ages when religious faith was strong, also over
his life in this world). According to Christian belief, “outside the Church
there is no salvation.” Because of fundamental differences in viewpoint,
various denominations have developed in Christianity, each with its own Church.

There is no clerical class and no Church in
Islam: we have already had occasion to remark that it is a churchless faith. All
human beings are equal before God. As is pointed out in the Farewell Sermon,
“Superiority lies only in fearing God and in doing good deeds.”

Matter and Spirit

But this is not all. It is written in the
sacred books that man was created from dust, or earth, or clay. The fact that
they are created from the same matter in addition to the same image might be
seen as a second reason for equality between human beings. But if man is only
clay, i.e. matter, he is in effect nothing more than a robot, a machine. And
all materialist philosophies have, in fact, treated him as mud because they do
not allow any other dimension to his existence. Even if they do not say so in
theory, this has always been the case in practice. The century we live in has
proved this beyond doubt, if nothing else.

Even if the image of man made of clay is holy,
therefore, this is not enough to protect his rights. The formula is incomplete;
or rather, it is half. What has been said for matter must also be said for
spirit, thus complementing and completing the formula. And this completion has
been performed by Islam.

Man in Islam

The principle of the Torah given above recurs
in Islam in two Traditions of the Prophet:

1. “God created man in His own
image.”

2. “God created man in the image
of the Compassionate.”

The Compassionate is
one of the attributes of God. Since the Essence of God cannot have a form, it
is plausible that man should be created in accordance with one of God’s
attributes.

Both Judaism and Christianity accept that man
has a spirit. Not much information can be found, however, in their sacred books
regarding this spirit.

How God gave life to man is described in the
Torah as follows: “The Lord God formed man (Adam) from the dust of the ground,
and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Genesis, 2:7).

There is nothing more here than
that man was given life. It is stated that man has been given life, just like
plants and animals. There is nothing that distinguishes man from them.
Similarly, in another book of the Old Testament (of which the Torah comprises
only the first five books), it is stated that upon death: “The breath returns
to the Lord who gave it” (Ecclessiastes,
12:7), which is synonymous with the Koranic verses to the effect: “We come from
God, and we shall return to Him.”

These statements save man from the status of a
dead lump of clay and raise him to the level of animals and plants, but do not
take him any further. Man is a living being, and God gives him life or takes it
back. In Sufic terms, this has brought the discussion to the level of the
Animal Spirit, but not the Human Spirit.

Man is Holy in Islam

We are nearing the end of our road. In his
words quoted above, Chesterton indicated that the origin of Man was divine, and
he could find only this when he sought a basis for democracy. For Chesterton,
as a Christian, the meaning of this divine origin is that God created Adam and
that all human beings descended from him. If we do not accept that humanity has
descended from a common ancestor, we can find no basis for declaring the
brotherhood of man. Suppose, for example, that humanity had two ancestors,
which did not in turn have a common progenitor. In such a case, humanity would
continue forever as two separate races or classes. (This is one of the dangers
inherent in Darwinian theories of evolution.) This means that the principle of
“liberty, equality, fraternity,” which is the motto of the French Revolution
and all democracies, can be invested with meaning and validity only on the
condition that we accept descent from an ancestor of divine origin, namely
Adam.

But even this is not enough. Let us repeat our
question:

Why are all human beings equal? Why does man,
every human being, possess great worth? (Because for this, even having
descended from Adam is not a sufficient condition.) Why do human beings have
certain rights? Why is it necessary to respect a human being, and not treat him
as mud in spite of the fact that that is his material origin?

The answer given by Islam is as
follows.

1.
“We breathed into man (Adam) of Our Spirit.”

This verse is repeated in three places in the
Koran (15:29, 32:9 and 38:72). The spirit that vitalizes Man is God’s Own Spirit which He has breathed
into man. This is why God has ordered the angels to bow to the ground
(prostrate themselves) before Adam (2:34). There is a spark, a breath of God’s
Spirit, in every man. The Human Spirit derives directly from the Spirit of God,
and this is why all human beings are
sacred. And because each human being has this spirit, human beings are equal in holiness, not in a nature of mud.

(What is being said here should not be
confused. Most emphatically, definitely and certainly, Man is not God. Rather, he bears within himself a spark that is
sacred, a trust that is divine.)

It can be seen that equality in form has been
transcended here, and equality in spirit has been reached. Not only image but
also essence has found its place. In other words, it is not possible to
discriminate between people not only in terms of matter and form, but also of
spirit and content. This is why the Koran states: “Killing another is like
killing the whole of humanity, and saving a human being is like saving all
mankind. We have indicated this in their Holy Book to the Children of Israel”
(5:32).

Or, as the Jews might put it,

He who saves one man

Saves the world entire.

This precept, which
should occur in the Torah, is found in the Talmud: Sanhedrin, Seder: Nezikin (Order: Damages), 4,5.

The way in which you treat a human being, therefore,
is like treating all humankind in that way.

2.
“God has created you of a single soul.”

This verse, in turn,
recurs four times in the Koran (4:1, 6:98, 7:189, 39:6). Interpreted from the
Sufic (esoteric) point of view, this means that all human beings are one. If
interpreted exoterically, in the sense that all men derive from Adam, it means
that all men are brethren. And as a matter of fact, the Prophet implicitly
alludes to the brotherhood of man in his Farewell Sermon: “Human beings, you
are all descended from one father. You are all the Children of Adam.” It is
stated elsewhere in the same sermon that: “A Moslem is the brother of another
Moslem, and so all Moslems are brethren, one of another.” The only difference
between the brotherhood of man and the brotherhood of Moslems is that the
former is articulated covertly and the latter, overtly. And the only reason for
this covert expression is that a non-Moslem, because he is not aware of this
brotherhood, may tend to act in ways that do not take it into account.

We therefore see that human beings are divine,
and in spite of all differences in external appearance, their essence is the same.That
is why they are equals of each other, that is why they have equal rights,
why liberty is their right and why they are brethren. Here is where the
foundation of democracy has been laid. Indeed, another of the Prophet’s
Traditions states: “All men are equal, like the teeth of a comb.”

The Judaeo-Christian West, where democracy saw
the light of day, realized that such was the state of affairs. But this truth
was not expressed with such blinding clarity in its traditions and holy books.
The most that could be achieved was to say, with Chesterton, that humankind was
descended from Adam. On the other hand, the flight from the negative aspects of
Christianity became an escape from religion in general, and precluded in-depth
study of the situation. The true source of democracy, equality, freedom and
fraternity lies in these explicit verses of the Koran.

Ethics and the Democratic Personality

Since this is the case, then, how should human
beings behave towards each other? Precisely in accordance with the morality
that God has prescribed for us. This constitutes the final gift of
religions—and especially, of Islam—to humanity.

Democracy is not just about the “separation of
powers.” It is not simply a multi-party regime, or general elections, or
equality of vote. At the same time and much more importantly, it means respect
for the rights of one another. In line with Voltaire’s famous dictum, it is to
limit one’s own liberties with one’s own will at the point where the rights of
others begin. It means the free flowering of each individual within
restrictions common to all, and to become as useful as possible to oneself, to
society, and to mankind. And this is what religions have all prescribed. This
is the ethics of democracy. The abovementioned may be the form of democracy;
this is its spirit. Where the core does not exist, purely formal democracy is
reduced to an empty shell, and is bound to perish sooner or later. Where this
spirit is, on the other hand, life never ceases to be bearable, and democracy
can easily be built up even if the formal requirements are not met. Democracy
cannot exist without a morality of democracy.

After the Second World War, T.W. Adorno et al. of the Frankfurt School published
a study on “the Authoritarian Personality.” In like manner, one can speak of a
“democratic personality structure.” And this can be achieved only with the
morality of the Koran. Because Islamic ethics, which is based on the Koran, is
the very essence of democratic morality. Respect for the rights of others and
remaining within the limits of one’s rights (even in the case of a ruler) has
never been emphasized in any religion as much as in Islam.

Jewish and Christian ethics, too, have many
sublime aspects. For these too are true religions revealed through prophets by
God. On the other hand, since they are not the perfect religion, they also
contain gaps. They have been unable to prevent the spread of atheism, alcohol,
illicit sex, intolerance and the Inquisition within their realms. Even the
famous historian Arnold Toynbee, himself a devout Christian, claimed that it
was necessary to turn to Islam in order to resolve the problem of alcoholism.

Drugs, rape, sexual perversion, drunkenness,
murder and robbery now plague America, the foremost democracy of the world. If
left unchecked, they will inevitably lead to its collapse from within. And the
only way out—if this can be done—is the adoption of an Islamic morality.

Conclusion

“Dear God, grant that we may sow peace wherever
we go. Let us be reconcilers and unifiers, not sowers of dissent. Allow us to
disseminate love where there is hate, forgiveness where there is injury, faith
where there is doubt, hope where there is despair, light where there is
darkness, and joy where there is sorrow. Grant that we may become in mercy like
the sun, in generosity like the rain, in humility like the earth, in hiding the
shames of others like the night; and in bestowing favors on everyone without
discrimination, like all four.”

This prayer is none other than the prayer of
democratic ethics, of the democratic personality. To the extent that these
ideals are approximated, both our lives and the lives of those around us are
enriched, enlightened, and infused with value and meaning. An oasis appears in
the middle of the desert. If everyone adopts this morality, peace, contentment
and happiness will belong to everyone. And that is when the true flower of
democracy will reach full bloom.

This takes us one step further, for it now
becomes possible to view democracy not as an end in itself, but as a means to
something greater. Contemporary democracy provides the institutions, the basis,
conducive to the best development of the human personality. It is here that
Islam can provide a guiding light, for the aim of Islamic Sufism is precisely
to cultivate development of the Self to stages where higher forms of thinking,
ethics, and behavior are possible.

Lewis Mumford, that astute social critic and
one of the most incisive minds of the 20th century, recognized that the
transformation of social institutions without the re-education of human beings
would not suffice for a happier society. “In rejecting a twofold change, inner
and outer,” he said, the proponents of lasting, significant social change
“overlooked the organic connection between personality and community, between
the individual and the collective form. They sought to transform the
institutions of society... and create a high order of social existence without
bothering to develop and discipline a
higher type of self. “[54]

Although not well acquainted with certain
aspects of Islam, Mumford nevertheless clearly understood that social and
spiritual improvement complement each other. While Islam is quite
down-to-earth, nonutopian and immediately practicable, it should be recognized
that it opens the door to “self-actualization”—to use psychologist Abraham
Maslow’s term in a deeper, Sufic, context—and the consequent betterment of
society is quite feasible. Not only that, but Sufism also describes the various
levels of Self with great precision, and outlines the process of
self-actualization step by step. Thus, Islam doesn’t lead us simply to
democracy as a political form, but also to its fulfillment.

But what if democracy does not take its
inspiration from Islam—what then?

1.A multitude of parties will sow enmity
between brother and sister, father and son, and will prevent the oneness of
mankind for the sake of negligible differences.

2.The triad of government, businessmen and
banks will unite for illegitimate profits.

3.Politicians, the media (press, radio, TV,
computer networks) and the merchants of passion will fan the fires of illicit
sex.

4.Behavior in accordance with the Four Holy
Books (the Torah, the Psalms, the Bible and the Koran) will disappear.

For the concept of
liberty in democratic societies is not based on the distinction between the
“prohibited” and the “permitted” (what is legitimate and illegitimate in terms
of divine sanction), and some people think that democracy means freedom without
limits. Unlimited freedom, however, is not democracy but anarchy. And,
furthermore, the “forbidden/allowed” distinction within religions has been
instituted, not because God wants to make life difficult for everyone, but
because mankind will be sucked into the maelstrom of its own destruction if it
does not abide by these rules.

And this is precisely what will happen, unless
democracy takes its further inspiration from Islam.

APPENDIX A:
UNIVERSAL LAW, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOD’S COMMANDMENTS

The 1789 Declaration of Human Rights has been
taken from the Ten Commandments in the Old Testament.

So claims Jacob Kaplan.[55]
And this, in turn, brings to mind the following question: Could it possibly be
the case that the basis for modern law, human rights, and such concepts as
freedom and equality, has been derived from religions?

As everyone knows, the Ten Commandments, revealed
by the Lord to Moses and his people, occur in the Torah (part of the Old
Testament). The “Twelve Commandments” revealed to Moslems, on the other hand,
are to be found in the Koran. Let us initiate this analysis with a comparison
between the two.

The Ten Commandments

The Ten Commandments, given in
more detail in Exodus, 20:2-14, are
summarized in Deuteronomy, 5:6-21.

1.I am the Lord your God. You shall have no
other gods before me.

2.You shall not make for yourself an idol
(graven image).

3.You shall not make wrongful use of the name
of the Lord your God.

4.Observe the sabbath day and keep it holy.

5.Honor your father and mother.

6.You shall not kill.

7.You shall not commit adultery.

8.You shall not steal.

9.You shall not bear false witness against
your neighbor.

10.You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.

The Twelve Commandments

As outlined in the Chapter of the
Night Journey (17:23-37) in the Koran, the Twelve Commandments of Islam may be
summarized as follows:

1.Do not set up another god with God.

2.Respect and be good to your father and
mother.

3.Help your relatives, travellers and the
poor.

4.Do not squander, nor be miserly.

5.Do not kill your children for fear of
poverty.

6.Do not go near fornication or adultery.

7.Do not kill wrongfully.

8.Do not approach (pillage) the property of
orphans.

9.Be as good as your word.

10.Be honest in measures and weights.

11.Do not pursue what you have no knowledge of.

12.Do not tread on the earth with vanity and
pride.

Comparison

For ease of reference, the Ten Commandments
will be referred to as “10C”
in this section, and the Twelve Commandments as “12C”.

Upon inspection, it can be seen that they both
start with the same injunction. In addition, note that 12C-1 covers 10C-2. 10C-5
is repeated in 12C-2. The order not to kill in 10C-6 occurs a bit differently
in 12C-7 because the former makes no allowance for self-defense. 12C-6 covers
both 10C-7 and 10C-10. Similarly, 12C-9 is the more general form of 10C-9.
12C-5 is included in 10C-6. 12C-10 is the more finely-tuned version of 10C-8.
Indeed, while 10C-8 prohibits theft, 12C-10 forbids even the slightest
intentional mismeasure.

As can be seen, eight of the Ten Commandments
are covered in some way in the Twelve Commandments. There remain only articles
3 and 4, of which the latter is specific to Jews and Christians.

Half of the Twelve Commandments, on the other
hand, do not occur in the Ten Commandments at all. Articles 12C-3, 4, 5, 8, 11
and 12 are nowhere to be found in 10C,
except, perhaps, for 12C-8, which with a little effort might be included in
10C-8. The other articles are Islam’s free gift and mercy to humanity.

The 1789 Declaration of Human Rights

Let us now take a look at the
definition of liberty in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man of 1789:

Art.
4. “Liberty consists in the ability to do whatever does not harm another.”

As can be seen, a very concise definition of
freedom has been given here, but nothing is said about the content of “whatever
does not harm another.”

What, then, are the things that harm others?

The Commandments of God given above describe
what these are.

The French Declaration of the Rights of Man is
based on the Judaeo-Christian religious and cultural tradition. The terms it
defines may be novel, but these have not developed in a conceptual vacuum; they
have a historical background. They did not simply fall out of the sky. It is
for this reason that the Ten Commandments constitute an explanation of and
commentary on the French Declaration of Human Rights. And the Twelve
Commandments of Islam are a more detailed and comprehensive version of the
former. Both human rights and the precepts of universal law, therefore, find
their origin in the Commandments of God.

It is noteworthy that both sets of Commandments
begin with faith in God and not associating any other gods with Him. The reason
for this is that the remaining Commandments are all predicated on this one. A
person may embrace the other Commandments without believing in God, but he will
feel free to interpret them and put them into practice as he pleases. Only if
he believes in the existence and unity of God, and that these Commandments come
from Him, will he act with greater trepidation and constrain himself to obeying
them more carefully.

The second point that calls for attention is
this: the points outlined in these Commandments are serious crimes deserving
serious sanctions in all sytems of law. Indeed, only when a legal code replaces
“You shall not kill” with “You shall kill,” “You shall not steal” with “You
shall steal,” “You shall not fornicate” with “You shall fornicate,” and “You
shall not lie” with “You shall lie”; only when it substitutes insult and
cruelty to parents in exchange for honoring them, will it become independent
of—and in fact diametrically opposed to— religion, God and the Koran. And then
it will no longer be Law, but the very essence of injustice and oppression.
Otherwise, no law can be independent of religion. Because God had already
revealed His Commandments to human beings before legal codes ever saw the light
of day, and these lie at the foundation of all legal systems worthy of the
name.

APPENDIX B:
THE ROOTS OF TOTALITARIANISM

Far from being totalitarian itself,
Islam—properly understood and applied—is the sole remaining bulwark against
totalitarianism in the modern world. For the currents of materialism, mechanism
and atheism, so prevalent in our day, are the modern causes of despotism.

“The true destination,” says Lewis Mumford, “of
such [despotic] government is automatism, and its real province is in the world
of machines. Despotism can succeed, in other words, only to the extent that it
can turn men into automatons... man may be treated as... a natural automaton, a
self-operating machine. To make men mechanical was merely to reverse the
process of making machines human.”[56]
This is the exact opposite of what Islam (and its mystical branch, Sufism)
calls for, since it aims to make human beings more fully human, to help them
realize their potentials.

The Eastern philosophies of Confucianism,
Taoism and Buddhism, while appealing to our contemporary Western mentality,
have been unable to sufficiently resist the spread of atheistic political
ideologies—which are also totalitarian—precisely because they themselves are
nontheistic. Writing in The Lotus and the
Robot (1960), Arthur Koestler observed: “The Chinese nation which had held
fast for two and a half millenia to the teachings of Confucius, Lao-Tse and the
Buddha, succumbed to the atheistic doctrine formulated by the son of a German
lawyer, and has become the most accomplished robot state this side of science
fiction.”[57]
And the reason for this is that none of these Eastern philosophies were
strongly monotheistic. It is only in a Godless, spiritual vacuum that
materialistic and atheistic “anti-religions” can flourish, sowing the seeds of
totalitarianism. Even Christianity has proved itself powerless to withstand the
merciless onslaught of secularism, materialism, and mechanism,[58]
and it is only Islam that has been able to resist them and the totalitarian
rules to which they lead.

This is what La Mettrie’s Man a Machine (1747) has finally brought
us to—a clear example, if ever there was one, of how metaphysical viewpoints
can translate into concrete results in the physical world. And in spite of the
demise of the Soviet Union, the world cannot be considered, even now, to be “a
safe place for democracy.” For the forces which Mumford so ably diagnosed,
materialism and automatism, are still at work in the world with little of their
energy spent. As machines and computers take on increasingly human traits,
human beings become more dependent on high-tech instruments and assume
progressively more automatic characteristics. Furthermore, information
technology, coupled with global satellite communications, will soon make it
possible to track any person via a transponder, ID card or implantable biochip.
As Zbigniew Brzezinski—National Security Advisor to five US
Presidents—observed: “The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a
more controlled society... Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous
surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files
containing even the most personal information about the citizen.” Once you have
the basic component of an anthill state—the automated person, or “cyborg”—the
possibility cannot be ruled out that society will metamorphose with a rapidity
and ease that would surprise anyone who hasn’t done his homework on George
Orwell’s 1984, Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, or the history of the
20th century. For God’s commandments are intended to keep the base self in
check; atheism (and its consequence, materialism) removes the restrictions on
the base self, and the very essence of
totalitarianismis the base self
unleashed. Like bubbles in water, the worst will then naturally percolate
to the top.

ADMINISTRATION:THE MATERIAL AND SPIRITUAL ADVANCEMENT OF MANKIND

(This section
contains information on administration materially and spiritually necessary for
a nation—from the head of state down to the last family member.)

Administration may be defined as the judicious
use of means to accomplish an end; it is the pursuit of a course of action in
order to achieve a certain task. In the political sphere, administration is
known as government, and in the world of business as management; hence, it is a
subject of both social and economic import.

A direct correlation may be observed between
the level of affluence of a society and the success of its government. The same
holds for a business enterprise. Whereas apparently insurmountable difficulties
are routinely and successfully resolved in a state governed with skill, thereby
improving that state and society, the inability to use the resources available
to statesmanship increases the problems of a society and destabilizes it. The
states that have been condemned to extinction in history have been led to this
fate by the failure to govern them.

Administration is the oldest science.
Throughout history, human beings have either ruled or been ruled. Before
administration became a science, human beings used to carry on by the use of
their common sense. As civilization progressed, theories and rules entered the
field of administration as well, thus making it a branch of science related to
other, similar fields. Originally, clever and talented persons within society
were regarded as leaders, and they were the ones who led society. At a later
stage, this task was undertaken by priests.

Although the science of administration is
relatively young, it is deeply rooted in experience. Many statesmen have
written books on this topic. Rulers and great statesmen in particular have left
us works describing their advice on how to handle affairs of state. Books such
as Aristotle’s Politics, Plato’s Republic, Caliph Ali’s Advice to Statesmen (his letter to the
Governor of Egypt), Nizam-ul Mulk’s Treatise
on Politics, Sari Mehmed Pasha’s Counsel
to Ministers and Rulers, Ibn Khaldun’s famous Muqaddimah, Farabi’s City of
Virtue, Muhammad Hamidullah’s Government
in Islam, and Ghazzali’s Advice to
Rulers, have all indicated the noteworthy aspects of administration and
rulership.

The History of Administration

Although Western sources indicate 1887 as the
starting point of the science of administration, it actually began with the
birth of mankind. The first written documents on administration date from the
Sumers (5000 BC); those on planning, control and organization, from the
Egyptians (4000 BC); the use of an attorney and filing an application, from the
year 2000 BC; and the institution of a payment fee, from 1800 BC.

No matter which field of endeavor we take up,
we are faced with the fact that the human factor is decisive in achieving an
end. The success of administrators, particularly those in charge of state
government and education, depends on many qualifications. Let us make a
comparative summary of these traits from various sources:

Ghazzali:
Values expert opinion in government, suggesting that kings and rulers should
consult scientists and experts. Among Western authors, Taylor advises the same.

Nizam-ul
Mulk: In his Treatise on Politics,
advises that the ruler’s door should be kept open to the people, that he should
draw lessons and make frequent checks on his staff, that administrators of
whatever level should take care to preserve their prestige, and that emphasis
should be placed on unhindered flow of information (communications). He also
outlined the positive and negative actions observed in rulers.

Farabi:
His City of Virtue is directly
concerned with administration. In this work, Farabi outlines the importance of
administration at various levels and the qualifications of administrators.

Ibn
Khaldun: In his opus Muqaddimah,
defined the nature of state administration, the role of the administrator in
the strengthening or weakening of a state, the principles of administration on
every level, the points to which administrators should pay special attention,
and the hazards of bribery and commercial involvement. He also dwelt on matters
relating to group-leader interaction.

Sari
Mehmed Pasha: This famed fiscal administrator, who lived in the eighteenth
century, made observations in a recessive state environment in his work, Counsel to Statesmen, comparing
successful and unsuccessful administrations. He explained the damages of
bribery and cruelty, pointing out that a good administrator is obliged to
provide a good example for his subordinates, and is responsible for their
training. Further, he considered the points to be borne in mind in the
appointment of candidates to administrative cadres, also providing specific
examples.

The advice given to rulers and statesmen in
these books on government and administration can be summarized under six
headings:

1.Act
intelligently: King Solomon, Plato, Confucius, Socrates and Taylor have
pointed out that intelligence and intelligent men are of prime importance in
administration .

2.Act
virtuously: Confucius, Lao Tzu, Mayo, Ghazzali, Ibn Khaldun all considered
that virtue should go hand in hand with intelligence, and found it necessary to
base administration on a combination of politics and ethics.

3.Be
daring: In the Mahabharata, which
reflects the administrative philosophy of India, and in Machiavelli’s Prince and Taylor’s Statesmen, boldness is considered to be the most important factor
in administration. Ibn Khaldun and Ghazzali also mention the importance of
courage in government.

4.Compromise:
Aristotle and Nizam-ul Mulk have explained how even the most powerful rulers
and administrators have to act positively and come to terms with opposition
parties.

5.Be
flexible: Aristotle, Machiavelli, Taylor, de Follet and Ghazzali have
suggested the use of all means not jeopardizing the end to be reached.

6.Consult:
Farabi, Ghazzali, Nizam-ul Mulk, Machiavelli, Castiglione and Fayole have
indicated that the consultant is indispensable for administrators and their
staff. In the opinion of one Indian philosopher, however, the expert is
necessary more for the implementation of a decision than for reaching the
decision itself. According to Castiglione, the effectiveness of the consultant
depends on his freedom to speak the truth without fear of reprisals.

Do’s for Administrators

As we have seen above, virtually all the
authors give the same formula for the success of the administrator. In the
Fourth Caliph Ali’s message to the administrators of the world, concise
expression is given to the concepts and principles of state administration.
This letter, which qualifies as “Advice to Statesmen,” was regarded as the
Constitution of that day and age. All the articles of that letter begin with
“in state administration” or “the statesman.” When we scrutinize this letter,
we notice that the counsel given by Western authors in books on administration
in the twentieth century are in substantial accord with the advice given in
this epistle. The articles in Ali’s letter can be summarized as follows:

1.Try to solve everything by gentleness,
without yielding to temporary passions.

2.Show love and kindness to those under your
rule. Do not be an inaccessible executive. Accept human beings with their
faults, and train them accordingly.

3.Be modest and well-balanced. Do not be sorry
for favors and clemency shown. Do not be pleased when you have to mete out
punishment! Do not shrink from applying the law, even when the criminal is your
own kith and kin.

4.Treat those you are responsible for justly
and equitably.

5.Make sure that everybody is happy with the
rules and principles to be followed in the flow of work.

6.Execute in conformity with laws pertaining
to the situation.

7.Far from searching for the errors of
others, guard these as secrets, correcting those faults which are amenable to
correction.

8.Do not be vindictive. Rather than prying
into a subject that is intentionally left unclear, appear not to have
understood.

9.Do not fall under the influence of gossips
and informers: try to see the facts.

10.Do not endow with authority the unqualified,
nor persons of a miserly, cowardly, passionate, or jealous nature.

11.Cooperate with those who oppose wrongdoers
and criminals; do not refrain from consulting them.

12.Take care not to distance yourself from brave
people who can speak the truth, even when it is bitter.

13.Treat human beings fairly and equitably, but
do not weigh those with high morals on the same scales as the potentially
harmful.

14.Be a model of goodwill.

15.Win the trust of those around you.

16.Do not stray from the mores and customs of
society.

17.Consult those whose knowledge is trustworthy.

18.Evaluate each service in its proper order of
duty and responsibility.

19.Be honest and patient.

20.Reserve favors and praise for those who are
worthy of them.

21.Use rewards and punishment in the right time
and place.

22.Do not distinguish between services. Do not
change your attitude in the face of the meanliness of a job.

23.Do not delegate power, even temporarily, to
those who are after their own self-interest.

24.Do not neglect controls and checks on your
subordinates. Keep track of a task you have given.

25.Help those who have problems to surmount
them.

26.Try to discern and eradicate errors as soon
as they arise.

27.Do not make concessions to exploiters and to
those who disobey orders.

28.Display emotions such as tolerance,
compassion, and love in the proper time and place.

29.Do not neglect apparently unimportant duties
while fulfilling important ones.

30.Do not forget that the duty being performed
is a service to the state.

31.Demonstrate mistakes and impart new
information to your subordinates by performing tasks yourself.

35.Be patient, and firm; always be moderate, and
seek the Golden Mean.

Don’t’s for Administrators

1.Vanity and conceit.

2.Desire to be praised to one’s own face.

3.Rubbing in a favor done.

4.Exaggerating matters out of proportion.

5.Turning back on a promise.

6.Making unnecessary concessions for one
reason or other.

7.Devoting unnecessary time to specific
persons in crowded groups.

8.Failure to display a firm attitude upon the
recurrence of a crime or error.

9.Failure to implement checks and controls.

10.Anger.

11.To act emotionally, to show weakness.

12.To speak recklessly here and there.

Ali’s Advice

We conclude with the following excerpt from
Ali’s Advice to Statesmen:

“... Never keep yourself aloof from the people
for any length of time, for to do so is to keep oneself ignorant of their
affairs. It develops a wrong perspective in the ruler and renders him unable to
distinguish between what is important and what is not, between right and wrong,
and between truth and falsehood. The ruler is, after all, human; and he cannot
form a correct view of anything which is out of his sight. There is no
distinctive sign attached to truth which would enable one to distinguish
between different varieties of truth and falsehood. The fact is that you must
be one of two things: you are either just, or unjust. If you are just then you
will not keep yourself away from the people, but will listen to them and meet
their requirements. On the other hand, if you are unjust, the people themselves
will keep away from you...

“Bear in mind that you should not throw away
the offer of peace which your enemy may himself make. Accept it, for this will
please God. Peace is a source of comfort to the army; it reduces your worries
and promotes order in the State. If you have accepted any obligations under a
peace treaty, discharge those obligations scrupulously. It is a trust and must
be faithfully upheld; and whenever you make a promise, keep it with all the
strength at your command: for whatever differences of opinion might exist on
other matters, there is nothing so noble as the fulfilment of a promise.”

WHAT IS SPIRIT?

(The section following this one, by the famous scholar Ghazali, is
quite abstruse. The present section is much more straightforward, and is
intended to ease comprehension of the next.)

Seeker after Truth, let me now explain to you a
little about Spirit.

What is the “spirit” that constitutes a locus
for the manifestations of God?

Can it be measured? Does it have color? Does it
occupy space? Is it within the body, or without?

The Lord Almighty instructed His Beloved
Prophet to answer those who want to know the truth about Spirit—one of the
secrets of Unity within the divine dispensation — as follows: “The Spirit is of
the Command of my Lord” (17:85).

The reply contained in this brief verse would
fill countless volumes.

Because the truth of the Spirit is a very
subtle lesson, it is expressed symbolically in this divine utterance. In order
to understand it, we must know something about the World of Command (alam al-amr) and the World of
Origination (alam al-khalq).

Men of religion cognizant of these worlds, having
been educated in the Faculty of Mohammed and able to speak God-ish, have given
various descriptions of Spirit, some of which are reproduced below. To those
who ask: “Is Spirit within the body?” they reply: “The Spirit is of the World
of Command. Any entity belonging to the World of Command is free of incarnation
and union. It is a subtlety from the Lord that diffuses at each instant and
manifests itself continuously. It cannot be extinguished, does not die, and is
indivisible into lesser parts. This subtle body, the seat of many sublime
truths, has been made the locus of a manifestation that causes it to know
everything, including itself. We do not have the right to speak about the truth
of the Spirit. Only the Prophet—the Pearl of the Universe—can do that. What we
can do is to speak about the states
of the Spirit.”

Having said this much, they next distinguish
between four kinds of Spirit:

1. the Human
Spirit,

2. the Animal
Spirit,

3. the
Vegetable Spirit,

4. the Mineral
Spirit.

The last three, they leave for investigation by
scientists who study the relationship between phenomena in pursuit of the
question: “Why?” Then they continue: “The Human Spirit is a Command from the
Lord in the sense described above. The renewal, change and transformations of
the body cannot harm its reality.”

Fakhruddin Razi, the renowned “Rhazes” of the
West, comments on the ‘Spirit’ verse: “The Spirit belongs to the World of
Command. It came into existence because the Lord commanded it to ‘appear’. This
fine substance, which is not a body belonging to the dense, coarse realm of
matter, enlightens corporeal things with its light like the sun, although it
does not extend its sphere to material bodies.”

And concerning the Animal Spirit, he remarks:
“As for the Animal Spirit, which belongs to the World of Origination, this is a
subtle vapor under the charge of the Lordly Command called the Human Spirit.
This is what is destroyed and dissipated at death.

“The unfortunates who believe that death is the
end of everything are those who cannot conceive of a Human Spirit as distinct
from the Animal Spirit. For there are many phenomena which demonstrate that
Spirit is not destroyed after separating from the body. Inspiration and
precognition, for example, are properties of the Spirit.”

Wasiti, one of those well-versed in the wisdom
of Islam, comments regarding the Spirit: “The Lord manifested His Beauty and
Perfection by spirits—referred to by the ‘speaking/rational (human) self’—and
hid them with His divine name: ‘the Coverer’. He bestowed on the Spirit an
infinitesimal part of His Attributes of Knowledge, Sight and Hearing. He gave
life to the universe with it. Just as scientists cannot attain to its truth,
neither can they have the power to raise the veil of the Spirit. If the beauty
of the Spirit had not been veiled, some ignorant or heedless people would have
been misled into thinking it was God, prostrated themselves before it, and thus
become sinners.”

According to Ibn Sina, the personal truth of
Man does not reside in this 150-pound bag of blood and bones.

Although Spirit is not distinguished in any way
before it enters the body—there is no term such as “your spirit,” “my spirit,”
“the spirit of ordinary people,” “the spirit of the Elect”—it does take on
these terms after becoming associated with bodies. “Elevated spirits,” “base
spirits” and “subtle spirits” are other names it assumes after entering this
relationship.

“Elevated spirits” are the spirits of the
Prophets and their inheritors who have attained perfection and reached
liberation.

“Base spirits” are the spirits of hypocrites
and those who go to the Afterworld as devious and cruel people.

According to Ismail Hakki of Bursa, the spirit
in Man consists of the Kingly (Human) and Animal Spirits.

The Kingly Spirit is the overseer and controller
of the Animal Spirit in its actions and implementation. The Animal Spirit is
the organizer and mover of bodies; i.e., it is the originator of all movement.

When the body of a human being dies and is
destroyed by the command of God, the Kingly Spirit and consciousness of that
person is not affected at all. As for the Animal Spirit, its center is the
heart, and it circulates throghout organs such as the brain, liver, lungs and
kidneys. It is present in all organs and all parts of an organ, and pervades
every iota of the body via the blood, the bearer of life.

Before the Animal Spirit enters a body composed
of the elements, it is present in the esoteric knowledge of the Kingly Spirit as
a force. When the Kingly and Animal Spirits enter the “statue” of a body, the
action of motion is manifested therein. These motive actions are entirely the
product of the Animal Spirit, whereas properties such as order, knowledge,
speech, and intelligence inherent in these actions belong to the Kingly Spirit
alone. If not for these properties, the manifestations originating from a human
being could not exist.

In summary, we may say that the Human Spirit is
an eternal mystery. Only men of knowledge—sages in possession of the Prophet’s
command: “Die before you die”—can know its true meaning.

Indeed, let us consider for a moment the sacred
verse: “When I fashioned him, and breathed into him of My Spirit...” (15:29).

God explains in this verse that He placed the
“Spirit” in a location that was capable of formation (being shaped and
moulded). Hence, the “clay” of Adam and Eve became the locus of the Spirit, the
place that “accepted” the Spirit.

Further, “I breathed into him” does not mean:
“I blew into him.” Rather, it means: “I inflamed the light of Spirit that was
concealed in his creation.”

The creation of the first human pair, Adam and
Eve, is itself shrouded in mystery.

Praise be to God, and His blessings be upon His
Beloved Prophet Mohammed, his Family and his Companions.

THE NATURE OF SPIRIT

This section is about what God’s
intention is in saying: “When I fashioned him and breathed into him of My
spirit...” (15:29).

Breathing the Spirit into Adam

“Fashioning” consists of an action in the locus
associated with the spirit. That locus is clay in the case of Adam, and the
seed in the case of his children. Mankind was thereby subjected to character
transformation and total arrangement. The body was brought to the purest
condition suitable for accepting and receiving the spirit, and thus for the
purpose of its creation. This is similar to the wick of an oil lamp, which
becomes ready for fire after being soaked in oil.

Breathing (nafh)
is the process of igniting and inflaming the spirit in its locus (receptacle).
Hence, the breathing is the cause of ignition.

It is impossible to comprehend the breathing of
God Almighty. The resultant self (nafs)
is explained by breathing (nafh). It
is the ignition and inflaming process in the wick of the seed.

In addition, there is the manner and end result
of breathing.

The manner, for the purpose of ignition or
inflaming, is the transmission of love and desire into the one who receives the
breath by the One who does the breathing.

The reason for the ignition of the spirit’s light
is an attribute which exists both at the Agent and at the receiving locus
(receptivity) which accepts the spirit.

The attribute of the Agent is Generosity, which
is the source of all existence. He graces all beings by infusing them with the
reality of being. This attribute is called Power, or Might.

This is similar to the case that,
when there is no hindrance, the light of the sun illuminates everything that
accepts or is capable of receiving illumination.

Receptivity (capacity) is to take on colors and
variety. It is not like colorless air.

The attribute of the receptacle is ‘moderation’
and ‘homogeneity’ created by the preparatory process. Indeed, God Almighty has
said: “When I prepared him..”

The attribute of receptivity is very similar to
the attribute of a mirror. For a mirror, unless it is cleaned and polished,
cannot accept and produce an image even if a form is standing in front of it.
But when it is polished, the form begins to appear as an image.

Similarly, when receptive homogeneity is obtained
in the seed, the spirit is realized in the seed without any change on the side
of the Creator. But the spirit is not created at that moment. This has occurred
earlier, since the locus has in the meantime been altered by the process of
homogenization.

The overflow of Generosity means that Divine
Generosity causes the light of being to shine in every nature capable of
accepting that Generosity. This is called the overflow of Munificence.

Of course, this should not be regarded in the
same way as the pouring of some water from a cup into one’s hand, since this
consists of some water reaching the hand after being separated from its source.
God Almighty is above and beyond such comparisons.

The Truth of the Spirit is a Secret

As for the explanation of the nature and truth
of the spirit: This is a secret. And the Prophet was not given permission to
explain this except to those worthy of it. If you are worthy, then you are able
to listen.

Know, then, that Spirit is not a thing which
enters the body like water entering a cup. Nor is it something that enters the
heart like the entry of the property of blackness into something black, or the
entry of knowledge into the knower. On the contrary, those who know unanimously
agree that it is a substance which does not admit of division. If it were
divisible, it would know something with one part, and not know with another, so
that it would then both know and not know, which is impossible. This
constitutes, therefore, a proof of its indivisibility.

But why wasn’t the Prophet allowed to reveal
the secret and truth of the spirit? Because the spirit has certain attributes
which cannot be comprehended. In those days, people were subdivided as ordinary
people and the informed. The ordinary people did not affirm even what God
allowed the Prophet to speak about. How could they have been expected to affirm
the properties of the Human Spirit? In fact, some of the ordinary people
proceeded to deny God by dissociating Him from corporeal existence and
manifestations. For they thought of God’s existence as an indication of His
corporeality. Those able to rise above the ordinary man’s way of thinking
immediately distanced God from being corporeal, but they in turn ascribed a
direction to God, because their mental acumen did not suffice to separate Him
from the properties of corporeality. Only a couple of schools were able to
dissociate God from both corporeality and direction.

And why should the secrets of the spirit be
hidden from the latter?

Because they have deemed attributes impossible
for anyone other than God. [I.e. they have gone too far in the direction of
Dissociation or Incomparability (tanzih).]
When you name an attribute in their presence, they immediately accuse you of
blasphemy, saying: “This is a comparison against God. You are ascribing an
attribute which is God’s to your own self. This indicates that you are ignorant
of the truth about God’s attributes.”

But just as we say that a human being is alive,
possesses knowledge, has power and will, hears, sees, speaks, etc., so too can
we claim that God Almighty possesses such attributes. Analogy is not intended
here, for these are not attributes peculiar to God. Similarly, independence of
space and direction is not an attribute peculiar to God alone; on the contrary,
it is one of the least essential. An example of a specific attribute would be
that God is Self-existent. Others besides God exist, too, but only He exists by
and through His own Self, without need of another. Further, although things are
both doomed to extinction and their existence is borrowed, God’s existence is
of His essence and is not borrowed from elsewhere, whereas the existence of
everything other than God is borrowed from God and is not of itself. This kind
of self-existence can belong only to God.

What is the meaning of the Spirit’s
relationship to God when He declares: “I breathed into him of My Spirit”?

The Spirit is independent of direction and
space. It has the ability to know and comprehend all sciences. This similarity
and relationship are not possible for other, corporeal things. Because of this,
it has been reserved for the Spirit relative to God.

The World of Command and the World
of Origination

You are composed of two things: a body and a
spirit. Man is an amphibious being—he is connected to the World of Origination
(khalq) with his body, and to the
World of Divine Power, or Command (amr),
with his spirit. This is made clear by the verse: “Say: ...The Spirit is under
the Command (amr) of my Lord”
(17:85). Everything that is subject to measure, proportion and quantity belongs
to the Realm of Origination. But the spirit and the heart cannot be measured or
expressed in quantitative terms.

As for the Worlds of Command and Origination,
their meaning is as follows. It is known that everything that happens to the
Spirit is a decree, a decision, and this consists of becoming associated with a
body and its attributes. This is what the World of Origination means.

This origination is by the foreordination of
God. It is not His corporealization and bringing into being. In the present
context, the origination of something means to ordain, to establish the state
of that thing before it comes into existence in this world. That which does not
possess quantity and ordination is called a Divine command. And this, as noted
above, is a state of similarity and relationship to God. Human and angelic
spirits, which are of this sort, are called the World of Command.

The World of Command consists of things that
possess no quantity, but fall within the purview of measure and decree by
becoming associated with the World of Origination, such as external entities
related to the senses, imagination, direction, spatiality, settling and entry.

If this is the condition of the spirit, is it
not, in that case, an eternal being rather than a creature?

Such an error can be the due only of the
ignorant and the deceived.

If someone says: “Not being ordained and
quantitative means the Spirit is not a creature, it is indivisible and has no
extension,” that is correct. But if he says: “The Spirit is not a creature in
the sense that it is eternal and not temporally originated,” this is wrong.
Some have believed that the Spirit does not have a beginning, that it is
eternally pre-existent, but this is erroneous. Others have erred in thinking
that the Spirit is body, but it is indivisible and continuous.

The appearance of the Spirit in the body
depends on the preparedness of the seed to receive it, just as the image of a
form facing a mirror can be seen only after the mirror is polished, even if it
was present before the polishing.

The Prophet said: “God created man in His own
image (in the image of the Compassionate).” Now what does this mean?

Image, or form, can pertain to a body. It can
be composite, and can consist of an overlay of simpler forms. It can also
pertain to meanings, which are of an intelligible, not sensory, nature.
Meanings may also be ordered, composite and harmonious.

But what about the image mentioned above? This
is an intelligible and spiritual form. It points to the similarity and affinity
with God mentioned earlier. It also goes back to the Essence, the Attributes,
and the Actions of God, and to the reality of the Spirit’s essence.

The Spirit is neither attribute, nor body. It
neither occupies space like a substance, nor does it admit of extension and
direction. It is neither connected to the body and the world, nor is it
separate from them. The body is not the true locus of the Spirit; it is only
its instrument. The Spirit is not joined to the body, and yet it is also not
distant from it. Instead, the Spirit uses the body in the service of its own
purposes. It is neither within the body and the world, nor without.

Now all these are the Attributes of God’s
Essence (or, His Essential Attributes). Primary among these Attributes are:
Life (the Living), Knowledge (the Knower), Power (the Mighty), Will (the
Willful), Hearing (the Hearer), Sight (the Seeing), and Speech (the Speaker).
The spirit also partakes of these attributes, and in this sense has an affinity
with God.

The Diffusion of the Spirit in the Body

As for the Actions of God: from the point of
view of will, these are the beginning of man’s own actions. Their effect first
manifests itself in the heart. It spreads from there via the animal (animating)
spirit, which is present as a subtle “vapor” in the cavity of the heart. It
rises thence to the brain. From there it is distributed to all the organs of
the body, including the fingertips. The fingers move by its influence, which
move the pen, which in turn moves its tip.

Hence, what is to be written takes shape in the
imagination. For if a person does not conceive what he desires to write in his
imagination first, it cannot subsequently be set down on paper.

A person who knows how God brings plants and
animals into being on earth and how He moves the heavens and the stars by His
Actions and angels (powers) will understand that man’s disposal in his own
world is similar to God’s disposal over the entire universe, the macrocosmos,
and will comprehend the meaning of the saying: “God created man in His own
image.”

The Difference Between Creation and Origination

The Prophet said: “God created spirits [long
before] He created bodies.” He also said: “In terms of origination, I am the
first of the Prophets. In terms of prophethood, I am the last. I was a prophet
when Adam was as yet between water and clay.”

Now what do these sayings mean?

The truth is: there is nothing in all this that
proves the Spirit is eternal. In the first saying, the spirits meant are the
angelic spirits. And the bodies are the body and existence of the worlds, such
as the heavens, the stars, water, air and earth.

As for the saying: “I am the first of the
Prophets”: Origination here means to be ordained. It does not mean creation or
bringing into being. For the Prophet of God was not created before he was born.
But purposes and results are first ordained, and then brought into existence
subsequently. For God Almighty first forms divine matters and temporally
engendered things in the Guarded Tablet.

Now, if you have understood what has been said
up to here concerning the two kinds of existence, you will also have understood
that the being of the Prophet preceded that of Adam, i.e. it came before not
just the first visible being, but also the first ordained being.

This is the last word on the
subject of Spirit.

God Almighty knows the truth in
this matter.

(From the writings of
Ghazzali.)

THE SPIRITUAL JOURNEY
OF THE SUFI

(Although
there are many spiritual schools or mystical orders in Sufism, the main orders,
founded by the principal saints, are twelve in number, the rest being offshoots
from these 12 Major Orders. And although the various orders exhibit diverse
characteristics and peculiarities, they all operate within the boundaries of
the same spiritual science, under the auspices of the Word of Witnessing and
the Word of Unification.

The following outline of the Sufic
disciple’s spiritual journey is based mainly on the practices of the
Naqshibandi Order, which, like all the orders, was named after its founding
saint, Master Bahauddin Naqshiband. However, anyone who studies this journey in
detail will understand the meaning and content of all the spiritual schools.)

Introduction

The Spiritual Journey is the journey of a
disciple or aspirant (murid ) to God,
Who is the Truth or Absolute Reality. The person who has embarked on this
journey (thuluq) is called the
Wayfarer or Seeker (thaliq).

For the person wishing to make this journey,
the first and by far the most important prerequisite is a Guide. Hence, the
first thing to be done is to find a wise and mature Teacher or Master (murshid: Enlightener). To start off on
this journey without a guide is like climbing a strange mountain at night
without a light. One cannot see where s/he is going or where to step. There is
no telling where a poisonous snake might bite him or where s/he will be
attacked by a predatory beast. An unbridgeable chasm will yawn under him at the
least expected moment. Without help, it is almost impossible to survive such a
journey intact.

The wise teacher, on the other hand, has
already performed the journey and survived. Further, he has seen and is
thoroughly familiar with all the pitfalls and dangers of the route. He guides
his disciple along the path with ease, and sees to it that s/he reaches the
Summit of Unity safe and sound.

If you ask: “Where, in this day and age, is
such a person to be found?” the fact is that although rare, such people exist
in every age. Needless to say, fake gurus abound. “Don’t follow every teacher,
he will lead your path astray.” But it cannot be denied that true masters also
exist.

The Goal

It may be appropriate at the outset to give
some indication of what the goal of the journey is. Put simply, it is nothing
less than the total transformation or transfiguration of the human personality.
To put this simply, there is another, hidden “you” that inheres in you. This
other “you,” the real “you,” is wonderful, beautiful, and adorable, and the
objective is to bring it out into the open, to realize it, to transfer it from
the potential to the actual. Anyone in whom this inner “you” is born (has
emerged) is called “twice-born.” The metamorphosis of a caterpillar—through a
chrysalis—into a butterfly is an apt metaphor here. In this process, the master
is midwife to the disciple’s rebirth.

“Know thyself,” said Socrates, and this was the
motto written over the Temple at Delphi. The Aristotelian injunction, “Realize
yourself,” and the Humanist injunction, “Perfect yourself,” were but different
expressions of the same thing.

Suppose we ask: what is the highest achievement
man is capable of? Obviously, the highest achievement for a scientist is to be
like Newton or Einstein—at least, to win the Nobel prize. The highest
achievement for an artist is to become as famous as, say, a Picasso or a
Michelangelo. For a writer, it is to be mentioned in the same breath as a
Goethe or Tolstoy, etc.

We next ask: what is the greatest achievement
that man as a man is capable of? What
is the full realization, the perfection, of man’s potentials as a human being?

According to the Sufis, it is to become a
Perfect Man, a Friend of God, saint, or sage. In English, Universal Man or
Unitary Man appear to be equally appropriate terms. Furthermore, this is a
stage that lies even beyond genius; if the greatest names of science, art,
literature, philosophy, statesmanship, etc. are mountain peaks in comparison
with the rest of humanity, the sage is an even higher mountain peak compared to
them. (This excludes the prophets, since prophethood ended with Mohammed.
Sainthood is the only option now available to man.)

The Socratic “Know thyself” finds its
culmination in the Prophetic Saying: “He who knows himself knows his Lord.”
Moreover, in the Koranic statement: “I created human beings only so that they should
worship Me” (51:56), “worship” has been interpreted by the saints as
“knowledge” (Gnosis), since the worship of God leads to knowledge of God. And
there is no greater experience or achievement for a human being than to
know—not superficially or theoretically, but truly to know—his Lord, to be a “God-realized” person. In such a
person, a new, altruistic personality has congealed and crystallized, like a
lily or lotus emerging from a muddy pond, or butter out of milk.

Indeed, those who have successfully completed
the journey are referred to as “the Transformed” (abdal, pl. budala). The
term is derived from the Arabic badal,
which affords some further insight into what is involved. The latter, meaning
“price,” indicates that these persons have cultivated a nonegotistical
personality, and have given everything, even their lives, for the sake of God
and His Prophet: they have “paid the price.” What they receive in return for
this payment are God and His Prophet themselves, meaning that they have become
clothed in the divine attributes of God, have become invested with a Godly
morality, and have achieved a Mohammedan (i.e. perfect) purity, morality,
spirituality and personality. This is why they are also called “Perfect Man” (insan al-kamil ).

Exoteric, Esoteric

Every true religion has two components: an
outward (exoteric, zahiri) and an
inward (esoteric, batini) aspect.

The exoteric aspect is more concerned with
external behavior and forms of worship, with social and corporeal conduct. The
esoteric, on the other hand, deals with the inner world of man, with his
spiritual and psychological dimension.

Now it is important to realize that if religion
is a coin, then its exoteric and esoteric aspects are two sides of the same
coin, comparable to the body and spirit of a human being. One cannot survive
without the other. A religion reduced to exotericism is like a corpse—it has
become pure, rigid formalism. And a religion that relies on esotericism alone
is a mere wraith, a ghost that cannot animate its body. If a religion, on the
other hand, combines both the exoteric and the esoteric, then we can say that
we are truly in the presence of a living religion, a religion with the power to
invigorate, to bestow life and felicity.

In terms of this criterion, one can order
religions within a spectrum ranging from exoteric to esoteric. Most will be
found to lie somewhere between the two extremes. The two religious philosophies
of China, Confucianism and Taoism, are notable for the fact that they lie at
the ends of this spectrum: the former is almost entirely formal, while the
latter is almost wholly inward. (This, of course, does not diminish the many
great truths and values embodied by either.) The two thus complement each
other.

Ideally, a religion should strike a balance
between the inner and the outer. It should be able to meet both the external
requirements and the internal needs of mankind. Moreover, form should match content. The external laws, customs, methods,
etc. of a religion should be in conformity with its inner practices. For this,
there are two requirements: that the religion should be a revealed religion,
and that it should have weathered time in its pristine condition.

Only God, the Creator of man, knows best what
is good for man. No scientist or philosopher can know this, for the simple
reason that the sum total of the possibilities and potentials of man remain
obscure to even the best human minds. This is why a religion should be revealed
by God. Moreover, only God can make the proper coupling between internal and
external and maintain their perfect balance.

Further, it is also necessary that such a
religion as practised in our day should be a faithful copy of its original: its
clear stream should not have become polluted, corrupted or shifted from its
course.

This brings us back to the requirement that
form should be coupled to its proper content. When we peel a banana, we do not
expect to find a slice of watermelon inside, nor do we expect to eat an apple
when we bite into a peach. Opening a bottle of a certain brand of beverage, we
will be surprised and, perhaps, disappointed if it contains water.

All this indicates that God has created every
exoteric formalism in association with its proper esoteric essence, and that
divorce of the two—for instance, trying to live the inner aspect of a religion
without regard for its external prerequisites—or substituting one kind of
interior for another while retaining the same exterior, will not lead to
results that are desirable.

Religions are organic, not mechanical things.
You cannot break them down and recombine them as you like. If you lop off the
head of a cat, the wings of a rooster, the body of a lion and the tail of a
peacock and attempt to put them together, the result will be a chimera, and a
dead one at that. This is why syncretism in religion often spells trouble.

To sum up, the external, exoteric aspect of
Islam is known as the Holy Law, and its spiritual, esoteric aspect is called
Sufism.

Spiritual Schools

For every kind of knowledge there is a school.
Anyone wishing to obtain higher education after primary and secondary school
will go on to college or university; to medical school, law school or
polytechnic institute in order to become a doctor, lawyer or engineer.

The difficulty, however, is that state-based
systems of education everywhere prepare people only for the material world, for
worldly success. They inculcate the basic knowledge necessary for surviving in
this world, and endow people with a profession. But they do not recognize or
answer the inner needs of human beings, nor do they assist their
psychic/spiritual/psychological development. Even religious instruction is
oriented more towards external conduct, regulations, and principles—all
exoteric matters. The inner life of man is neglected.

But we neglect that inner life only at our
peril. If nothing else, the self-destruction of Europe in two world wars—and
the more recent destruction of its values in Bosnia—should make us pause to
think and reflect: we should recognize that negative subconscious contents and
accretions can result in explosive discharges that are as totally unexpected as
they are universally destructive. The outer world shapes the inner world of
man; but conversely, the inner world of the individual also has an influence on
the outer and social world. Without appropriate spiritual training, pacifying
the soul and satisfying its inner cravings, that influence can only be
negative.

In our day, such moral/spiritual instruction
has taken on an added urgency. Mankind’s scientific and technological
advancement has far outstripped its moral progress. Somehow, man’s spiritual
maturity must be brought to the same level as his technical prowess—if nothing
else, in order to control the latter and channel it to constructive ends—and the need for this is much more urgent in
a scientifically advanced society than in ages and civilizations that led a
more pastoral existence. This is not only because of technological man’s
incredibly magnified capacities for destruction, but because, having solved its
economic problem and rid itself of material want, the way lies wide open for
humanity’s unfettered spiritual improvement. The Chinese symbol for crisis is
composed of two parts, one signifying danger and the other, opportunity. The
dangers inherent in our present civilization are great, yet the opportunities
are equally great.

Since, therefore, human beings do not live in
the external world alone—since each one possesses an inner world in addition to
the outer, which they all share—and since training this inner world is not only
possible, but absolutely necessary, there have to be certain esoteric, or
spiritual, schools in order to provide this education. And so there are. If
they did not exist they would have to be invented, in order to meet this
unsatisfied need of human beings.

These are the schools of the “Mohammedan
University.” Each one follows a different path, but they are all united in the
end result. They are, as it were, the educational units of an “Invisible College.”
Whoever attains moral, spiritual and psychological growth advances in these
schools.

There is an important reason why these schools
are not formal and official, like other schools. In this case,
institutionalization yields results at odds with the intended goal. The
official university is predominantly a matter of rigid form and structure. What
is intended here, however, is exactly the opposite—the purpose is to pass from
form to content, from external appearance to inner meaning. Spiritual education
and progress is not something to be achieved formally, by bureaucracy and red
tape. But the human tendency to organize and to create institutions is so
strong that examples can be found in history where even these schools, with
their extremely fluid and informal structure, have become ossified and
consequently less able to fulfill their purpose.

The Perfect Master

The master-disciple relationship is a
time-honored method of teaching: as Michael Polanyi has pointed out,[59]
it holds no less true in science than it does in mysticism. Indeed, it is the
accepted form of instruction in all branches of science and art.

Although the mature spiritual master has many
distinguishing properties that set him apart from other people, the main ones
are as follows:

1.He follows God’s Commandments and the Way
of the Prophet meticulously.

2.Your worries and anxieties are dissipated
in his presence, giving way to contentment and affection.

3.You do not wish to leave his presence. Your
enthusiasm and affection increases with every pearl of wisdom he utters.

4.All persons young and old, of high or lowly
standing—even heads of state—feel obliged to offer him their respects and
receive his blessings.

(Note that extrasensory powers or acumen are
not counted among the above. Such capabilities may or may not be manifest in a
master, but these cannot be taken as basis for proper instruction. A student
who approaches a teacher with the sole purpose of mastering such powers will be
rejected, and rightly so, for these are merely possible and mostly undesirable
by-products, not the goal, of the journey.)

Walt Whitman was speaking for the perfect
master when he said: “I and mine do not convince by arguments; we convince by
our presence.” What the Koran says can be read in the master’s movements and
face.

All the actions, behavior and diposition of a
person having these characteristics are consistent with the model of the
Prophet. It is necessary to submit with a sincere submission to whomever
possesses these traits without hypocrisy or exhibitionism. The aspirant should
be like a “dead man in the hands of the one washing him” with such a master,
obeying his every instruction. In fact, even his admonishments and punishments
should be regarded as a blessing.

Actually, the perfect master is the most loving
and affectionate of human beings. Especially those who are ardent for God and
His love find him to be kinder and more compassionate than their own parents.
To the wayfarers who visit him, he first teaches the science of religion. He
resolves their difficulties in accordance with the Way (sunnah) of the Prophet. He clears away their doubts, rectifying and
fortifying their faith. Then he instructs them in matters of cleanliness and
performance of the Prayer (Ar. salat,
Pers. namadh). As emphasized earlier
in this book, nothing is possible without
Prayer. He also explains submission, contentment, trust in God, and the
importance of pleasing God.

One of the characteristics of a mature master
is to cover up shames. He never reveals the shames, errors and misdeeds of
people, and always conceals them from others. He knows how to keep a secret. He
is never angry with anyone and never utters a word that will hurt somebody. His
anger and severity are reserved only for situations which his devotion to God
require.

Such a perfect man always chooses the middle
course in his eating and drinking, in sleep, speech and dealing with people. He
applies the principle: “The median of everything is the best” in his habits and
worship. He avoids the extremes of too much and too little, following a path
midway between the two.

This intermediate form of conduct is specific
only to saints and perfect men of the highest standing. Indeed, our Prophet has
remarked: “Moderate conduct is the most beautiful of acts and the most admired
of charming traits.” There can be no doubt that a mature person endowed with
this “Golden Mean” in his ways is the worthiest to instruct and advise others,
and best suited to this task.

The Gifted Disciple

In the spiritual journey, not only the master
but the disciple, too, must possess certain qualities. Receiving is as
important as giving; if a student cannot receive instruction, the efforts of
even the best teacher will be foiled. In addition, appropriate preparation is
as necessary here as in the case of an ordinary journey.

The distinguishing characteristic of a gifted
disciple is this: he is constantly at war with his self. He torments and
tortures this enemy with hunger, thirst, and speechlessness. He endures various
difficulties and resists the inclinations of his self, grasps it with a
powerful grip, and succeeds in subduing it. The gifted disciple is a
self-surmounter; he is always striving to climb beyond his present level of
selfhood.

The sole desire of the talented disciple is to
purge his self of all undesirable and condemned characteristics. For he knows
that his self is his own greatest enemy and that it is the source of the most
dangerous spiritual illnesses. And for this reason, he strives his utmost to free
himself from the effects of his ego.

Why is this characteristic required in a
disciple? Because if he is content and satisfied with the level of self he
happens to be in, there will be no motivation left for further progress to
higher stages. Self-satisfaction is the nemesis of self-transcendence, and
freezes progress.

Bahauddin Naqshiband, the founder of the school
known by his name, says: “I have two legacies for travellers on this path. The
first is: no matter what stage the traveller attains, no matter how far he
progresses, he cannot achieve salvation and liberation unless he regards his
self as a hundred times worse than the self of Pharaoh.[60]
And the second is: no matter what stage he reaches, the traveller cannot be
saved and will be ruined unless he considers himself a novice, who has as yet
taken only the first step on the road.”

If someone hurts him, the talented disciple
does not curse or swear in return. Instead, he finds fault with his self, and
says: “If my self were not bad, God would not allow these servants of His to
pester me like this.” If someone complains of him to his master, he tells his
master that not they, but he, is to blame, and that the fault is his.

Such a traveller, then, who can conquer his
self, can hold it in his palm, and who blames only his self for all errors, is
gifted and worthy to enter this path. If he exhibits certain errors and
imperfections from time to time, these may be excused, and do not constitute a
permanent obstacle to entering the True Path. For when he observes bad behavior
in himself, he criticizes his self. He does not exchange bad words with anyone,
nor does he swear at them. He blames his self for every mistake and never sides
with it. He does not allow himself feelings of superiority .

But if the traveller is happy with his self; if
he fails to struggle against it; if self-love and pride overcome him; if he
cannot vanquish it by remaining hungry, thirsty and sleepless when necessary;
if he places the blame on those who beat or swear at him; if he takes offense,
becomes their enemy, and tries to exact revenge; if he sides with his self,
seeking its ease and comfort—this disciple does not have the talent to embark
on the journey, and cannot even sniff the aroma of the path of the saints.

The basis of the road of those close to God is
to be displeased with one’s self and to be its enemy—to Struggle (mujahada) against the self and thereby
join the ranks of those who achieve Observation (mushahada). If the traveller does not build his spiritual career on
this foundation, he will be building on quicksand, and sooner or later it will
fall down like a house of cards. Because he who does not know his enemy cannot
find his friend.

We should pause here to clarify the meaning of
“Struggle,” “Observation,” and the relationship between the two. Struggle is
the struggle—the Great Work, effort, and labor—against the self and its
selfishness. As selfishness is defeated, one rises to progressively higher
levels of the self. Now the degrees of observation (or perception) available to
these different levels are not the same. The five outer (physical) senses are
common to all human beings, correspond to the base self, and determine our
perception of what is called the “observable universe.” There is, however, an
Invisible (ghayb) World in addition
to the visible world. Now there are things that are invisible or unobservable
to the unaided senses, such as radio waves, even in the visible world. When we
say Invisible World, however, we mean primarily the Spiritual World, susceptible
to perception by the five inner (spiritual) senses, which are the counterparts
of the five external senses (inner sight, inner hearing, etc.). Naturally,
since these inner senses ordinarily lie dormant, people are not aware of their
existence. As one attains higher levels of the self, these senses are awakened,
and what is normally invisible becomes observable. This is what is meant by
Observation, which comprises various categories such as Revelation (wahy), Unveiling (kashf ) and Intuition or intuitive perception (emergence into
consciousness). The highest stage of Observation is the Vision of God. But this
sight is possible only in the most refined states of self-purification.

On this journey, three rules of conduct are
essential for the traveller:

1.No matter what level of maturity the
disciple attains by the grace of God or the aid of his master, he must try to
increase his humility, his self-effacement, and his nothingness. If he is able
to do so, he should consider this, too, to be a grace of God and give thanks to
Him. He should never fall into self-assertion. The servant should remain firmly
established in poverty, weakness and nothingness, which characterize the
station of servanthood. He should not reach out for power, majesty and
self-sufficiency, which are the attributes of God, until God strips that person
of human attributes and grants him subsistence through His Essence. Deviation
from self-denial and self-renunciation on this road is unbecoming in a
disciple. Whoever desires to be freed of mortality will abide by this.

2.When a state, behavior, or anything else
that displeases the master manifests itself in the disciple as an ordinary
human failing, he should not lose heart and cease to visit or serve his master
in the belief that all is lost, and that he is of no use anymore. Utmost
attention should be paid to this point.

3.When the master orders something, it should
be carried out happily and with gladness of heart to the best of one’s
abilities.

These three
manners are of the greatest necessity for the disciple.

General Rules

On the road to Truth, there are many things to
be learned and many methods to be applied. We shall only dwell on certain
general rules here, and shall select the Way of the Naqshibandi (Naqshi for
short) as an example.

It has been said that “the end of all roads is
the beginning of the Naqshibandi road.” It is the shortest path of closeness to
God.

One of the finer points inherent in this saying
is that with the Naqshis, the master shows the disciple the goal of the journey
at the very outset, so that the disciple can then concentrate his efforts with
full consciousness on the achievement of this goal.

The prophet taught the science of wisdom and
presence privately to Abu Bakr (the first Caliph), but did not divulge it to
the general public, not even to the other caliphs. There are three principles
on this path: eating sparingly, sleeping sparingly, and talking sparingly.

Eating little leads to short sleep, short sleep
leads to talking little, and talking little is a great aid in invoking God in
one’s heart at every instant. Hence, the main thing is to eat sparingly.

Eating little also has a second benefit.
Satiety leads to pride, and pride leads to anger. Thus, eating little also
holds these two in check.

Actually, it is enough for those entering this
path to observe moderation in food, drink, sleep, and speech. There are three
conditions for this:

1.To put away all worldly thoughts, images
and memories from the mind.

3.Always to be in Vigil (wakeful watching)
of, or Communion with, God (muraqaba),
to bear God in mind.

The spiritual prerequisite of this path is the
love of God and longing for Him. If this worry, this concern has entered a
heart, this should be regarded as the greatest gift, and one should ceaselessly
strive to increase it without losing it.

The Invocation (dhikr: literally, remembrance) of God in one’s heart is the
shortest road that leads to God, and the key to the inconceivable world of
Unity, which also protects one against troubles and calamities. The gain of
those entering this path is always to be in God’s Presence. When that Presence
takes root in the heart, it is called Observation (mushahada). When Presence becomes Stabilized (tamkin), i.e. when it becomes permanent and free from Variation (talwin), the goal is achieved. God is
known at every moment, one is always with Him, and is never heedless of Him at
any instant.

The Naqshis have three methods to achieve this.

Method 1

The invocation (dhikr) of: “No deity but God” (la
ilaha illAllah). The invoker repeats this “Word of Unity” with a peaceful
heart. In the case of the Naqshis, the repetition is performed not aloud, but
silently, from the heart. (The Prophet taught the silent invocation to Abu
Bakr, the first Caliph, and the vocal invocation to Ali, the fourth Caliph.) In
pronouncing the negation: “(There is) no deity”, one considers all things and
all beings as nothing, and in pronouncing the affirmation: “but God”, one
contemplates the eternal existence of God. During the repetition of this sacred
word, the tongue is folded back and its bottom is pressed upon the palate. The
wayfarer holds his breath for reasonable periods of time, and repeats the invocation
with such intensity that its effect is spread to all parts of the body. In
everything the disciple does, he does not fail to repeat it under any
circumstances. This repetition is not weakened or relaxed even when speaking,
eating, or during sleep. When one notices that this state is waning, one
summons one’s attention and again concentrates, and finally the invocation
settles and becomes permanent.

Method 2

The invocation of “God” (Allah). The invoker turns to God with his heart and invokes His
majestic name. In repeating, he should consider God as being present at every
point in the universe. He should repeat the invocation with such vigor that he
passes away from himself, and arrives at such a rank that this state is ever
present in his heart—it becomes a property of his heart, his heart is filled
with that light, and he experiences great pleasure.

Whatever the states of the heart may be, these
should remain in the heart. The secrets that are revealed to it should not be
divulged to the public, and one should not step beyond the bounds of the Divine
Law (the principles of Islam).

If the invoker does not fail to think of God
for even an instant, if he invokes God’s name even in his sleep and does not
stand aloof from Him, his sleep as well as his wakefulness will be the presence
of God; he will quickly achieve spiritual poverty and extinction. Depending on
the aptitude of the aspirant and the grace of God, the period in question can
be anywhere from an instant to a lifetime.

Method 3

The third method, Connection (rabita), is the way of binding the
heart. The wonderful conversations of a perfect master pave the way to divine
communion. By the power and virtue (baraka)
of those discussions, the light of spirituality and inner meaning flows into
the aspirant’s heart. If this meaning is diminished, the disciple must again
avail himself of the master’s discussions, until he can hold the master’s image
in his imagination even when they are separated, and he drives all other
thoughts and memories from his heart, leaving only the form and memories of his
master.

There is no closer way than this. If the
enlightened face of that master—perhaps the middle of his eyebrows—does not
leave his mind for even a second, if he is not heedless of it while sitting,
standing, or eating, if he can always bear it in mind—and this is quite
difficult to achieve for the disciple—the wayfarer reaches such a rank in the
end that the image of the perfect master takes root in his heart, and he can
imagine it at every instant without difficulty.

But if courtesy (good manners) is violated,
this path of illumination can be interrupted in the disciple. It is then very
difficult to re-establish the Tie and communication. To find the conversation
of such an exalted and valuable master is a great boon in this day and age.

The Eleven Principles

We cannot, in a treatment such as this, leave
the “Eleven Words” of the Naqshibandis unmentioned. The first eight of these
were established by Master Abdulhaliq Gujduwani, and the last three were added
by Sheikh Naqshiband.

1.Invocation
(Yad Kard or dhikr). Basically,
this is to invoke the Word of Unity while holding one’s breath (habs dam) for a suitable period of time.
Retaining the breath during a certain number of invocations prevents the
attention from wavering and the mind from wandering.

2.Knots
(Baz Gasht). This refers to short prayers that punctuate Invocation (see
above). When the number of invocations during breath retention is finished and
one is exhaling, one repeats such a formula as: “My Lord, You are my goal and
my desire is to please You.” This prevents thoughts from straying, and the
invoker is delivered from recollections and baseless thoughts that might flood
his heart.

3.Wakefulness
(Nigah Dasht). Cognizance of, and combat against, mental distractions. One
must fight off various thoughts and images that assail the mind, and the heart
and attention should remain centered on God. This is very difficult and
requires great effort. Breath control is the most important aid in achieving
it.

4.Recollection
(Yad Dasht). Always to remain attentive of God. Everything except God
should be removed from the heart and mind, and concentration should be centered
on Him.

5.Watching
one’s breath (Hosh Dar Dam). Every breath of the Seeker should be inhaled
and exhaled with wakefulness and awareness. Breathing should be controlled, and
one must be fully conscious of one’s inhalations and exhalations. Master
Shahabuddin Suhrawardi has clarified the reason: “He who does not control his breath
cannot control his self, and he who cannot control his self belongs to the
company of the ruined.”

6.Journey
to the homeland (Safar Dar Watan). The spiritual journey back to God, from
whence the traveller (and indeed, everything else) came. The voyage from bad
and disgusting behavior to salutary conduct.

7.Watching
one’s step(Nazar Bar Qadam). The
Seeker should always keep his eyes on his feet. If he looks around
indiscriminately, his attention will stray, what he sees will be impressed on
his heart, and confusion will result. Also, in a metaphorical sense, he should
always be aware of where he is going, and never lose sight of the journey’s
goal.

8.Solitude
in company (Halwat Dar Anjuman). To be in
the world, but not of the world; to be
with people (or God’s creation) externally, but to remain with Truth (God)
internally. To concentrate on preserving one’s spiritual state as if one were
alone, even in the presence of others.

9.Pause
of time (Wuquf Zamani). The Seeker should pause from time to time for
self-examination and self-criticism. One should give thanks for one’s good
conduct and repent for what is bad in oneself.

10.Pause
of numbers (Wuquf Adadi). To take care that the required number of
invocations have been completed during breath retention. One begins with a
single invocation (say, of the Word of Unity) and gradually raises this to 21.
For example, one inhales, repeats the formula three times, then exhales. If a
certain result has not been obtained even though 21 repetitions have been
reached, it may be necessary to repeat the cycle.

11.Pause
of the heart (Wuquf qalbi). To imagine that the true name of God is
inscribed in the Seeker’s heart, and to train the mind until this visualization
becomes permanent.

It can be seen
that these eleven rules are mostly concerned with the concentration of
attention, and with breath retention and breath control.

Chart of the Spiritual Journey

On the road to Truth, to Absolute Reality, the
traveller is always in a different state at each step of the way. It is useful
to tabulate these in order to gain an overall view. The contents of this chart,
shown in Table 1, will be briefly described.

The points
that we need to bear in mind are:

1.The chart is not precise, but serves to
give a general idea only.

2.Various sources give this table in
different and sometimes conflicting ways. Ibrahim Hakki of Erzurum was a great
saint. His classification is followed here, but other sources have also been
consulted.

3.The journey of each traveller diplays individual
peculiarities. Perhaps for this reason, masters do not indulge in detailed
explanations about the chart of spiritual progress.

It should be
remembered that the chart is a convenient device for comprehension, rather than
a rigorous exposition of details.

Worlds

In the Sufic conception, the observable
universe, the physical world of coarse matter, is only the lowest of
existential realms. Beyond it are domains that do not lend themselves to
physical measurement for the simple reason that they are nonphysical (or
prephysical, “pre-” being here used in an ontological rather than necessarily
temporal sense). The number of worlds, including the physical, are basically
four. And no one has expressed this fourfoldness with greater poetic beauty
than William Blake:[61]

Now I am. May God us keep

From single vision fourfold vision see,

And a fourfold vision is given to me;

‘Tis fourfold in my supreme delight

And threefold in soft Beulah’s night

And twofold Always and Newton’s sleep.

“Single vision” is the vision that sees only
the world of gross matter, that denies reality to any other level of existence,
including God, who is Absolute Reality. Thus, a relative, partial vision of
reality negates total, Absolute Reality on the basis of nothing except its own
bias and incompleteness, which is the very epitome of irrationality.

Yet the founding fathers of modern science
never intended it this way. To exclude every reality other than what is capable
of knocking you on the head is a betrayal and travesty of their original
conception. To be sure, they confined their investigations to the realm of
sensory experience; and behind every law of nature they saw the Divine
Lawmaker, without whom all would be chaos, if indeed it could exist at all
(which it could not). Newton believed in One God: “This being governs all
things... as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be
called Lord God Pantocrator, or Universal Ruler” (Principia). His researches into alchemy point to an interest of the
great scientist in the transformation of the soul, for which the transformation
of base metal into gold is merely a metaphor.

Kepler combined in himself love of the One God
with scientific devotion to the discovery of His harmony as evidenced in nature
(specifically, the elliptical motions of the planets)—he was the most salutary
example of the fusion of science and religion in a scientist.

Descartes, too, believed in God; as quantum
physicist Werner Heisenberg once noted, he trisected totality into God, man,
and universe, and the division between man and universe he formulated in the
dualism between mind or consciousness (res
cogitans) without extension, and matter or extension (res extensa) without consciousness. Copernicus rightly believed
that scientific knowledge could only lead to evil in the hands of the
spiritually impure.

The metaphysical assumptions of these great men
may have finally led to our present conception of a soulless, Godless,
mathematical and mechanical universe, but this was never their initial
conscious aim.

Hence, what we have to do is to “re-vision” the
whole scientific enterprise, to go back to the founding fathers; not
necessarily to revise, but to take a fresh look, to examine our knowledge and
assumptions in a new light. When we do so, we shall discover that there is
nothing in our science to rule out or contradict the existence of other
existential domains, since that knowledge was never intended to describe
anything other than the physical world in the first place. If I decide to
confine my attention to a study of the objects in my room, without even
bothering to look out the window, this does not mean that nothing exists beyond
my room.

The Sufis, then, believe in the existence of
the material world, but allow also for the existence of other planes of reality
(alam, pl. awalim). This is not a question of reducing the material world to
the spiritual or ideal (note in passing that “spiritual” and “ideal” are not
identical) world, or vice versa; not a question of “either/or,” but of
“both/and.”

These “other worlds”—or, if you wish, “parallel
universes”—have each been referred to by more than one name by the Sufis. As in
Blake’s Fourfold Vision, there are four realms in the simpler, basic
classification: Human, Angelic, Majestic, and Divine (respectively Nasut, Malakut, Jabarut, and Lahut). These are to be conceived as
hierarchical rather than equal in rank.

The Human
World is, quite simply, the world of human beings, the world we witness and
perceive with our five senses—the physical, material or observable universe.
For this reason, it is also called the World of Witnessing (i.e. the world that
we witness), the Base (lowly) World, or the World of: Elements (after the
classical four elements), Births, Creation and Dissipation, the Visible, Fear,
Heavens, Spheres, Stars, and Bodies. It is often called the Kingdom (mulk).

The
Angelic World is the world of dominion, where God is the recognized
absolute ruler. For this reason, it is also called the World of Command. It is
the Unseen (ghayb) world of angels
and spirits.

In our chart, the Angelic World occupies two
adjacent cells: the Interworld and the World of Spirits.

a)The
Interworld is the “isthmus” or intermediate world, the World of
Imagination, accessible in twilight states of consciousness (between sleep and
wakefulness). Its basis is the Imaginal World (alam al-mithal ) or World of Symbols (Archetypes), which is
superior to it.

b)The
World of Spirits is superior to the Interworld, and is also known as the
World of Meanings or the Dreamworld. It is the locus of awe.

The
Majestic World is the World of Power. It is also known as the World of
Realities. This is also the stage where the Mohammedan Reality manifests
itself, and the disciple is filled with Mohammedan Light.

The
Divine World is the World of Divinity, and is, like the Angelic and
Majestic Worlds, an Unseen, Unobservable or Invisible world—in fact, it is the
Unseen of the Unseen of the Unseen, or U3. The divine principles are
framed at this level, the World of Loftiness. It is the World of the (Infinite)
Cloud (ama), to which the Prophet
referred when he was asked: “Where was God before He created the universe?” He
answered: “My Lord was in point of a cloud without top or bottom.” (That is, He
was present at every point of an infinite—homogeneous and isotropic—cloud of
white light.) In Sufism, it refers to the level of Absolute Unity and Eternity.
Although it appears in only one cell, it actually encompasses the last three
cells of our chart.

Sometimes, the Self or Identity of God is
differentiated from this Divine World and assigned a separate status. This is
then called Hahut (from huwiya: “He-ness,” Identity, or Divine
Ipseity) and the five realms that thus result are called the “Five Presences” (hazrat hamsah). In this case, when one
wishes to refer to the fourfold scheme, Lahut
and Hahut together are called the
World of Glory (Izzah).

The Essence (dhat) of God in relation to Himself is called Absolute Unity (Ahadiyah), and corresponds to Hahut. (This is the unknowable Hidden
God, the deus absconditus, and it is
forbidden to speculate about the nature of God’s Self or Essence.)In relation to His Creation, it is
called Oneness (Wahidiyah), and
corresponds to Lahut. The latter is
associated with the Most Sacred Body (wujud
al-aqdas).

Return to
Witnessing. Here, the return begins from the Unseen to the Human
(Witnessed) World. This, however, is not a return to an earlier state, but a
proceeding, a going forth.

Unity in Diversity, Diversity in Unity.
The Divine World is experienced in the states of Extinction (fana) and Subsistence (baqa). Unity in Diversity is the final
stage.

Present at the Creation

Creation begins with God. In the beginning—and
this is an ontological, not a temporal, beginning, since time does not yet
exist and hence it makes no sense to speak in temporal terms—God was a hidden
Being who had not yet manifested Himself. This is the stage of Absolute
Invisibility, Absolute or Unconditioned (nondelimited) Unity, the World of the
Absolute, the Singular Existent, or Mother of the Book (the book of the
universe). Since space and time do not yet exist, this is totally nonspatial
and nontemporal; it is non-space and non-time. Rather, it may be called “the spacetime
of spacetime,” since the entire spacetime continuum takes shape within it. (In
terms of unity versus multiplicity, we can compare this stage to a priceless,
perfect jewel possessing absolute symmetry, and which is single, whole, and one
in every imaginable way.)

When God desired to be known, He manifested His
being in the remaining three worlds:

First, in the World of Divine Power—the First
Conditioning or Limitation, the First Manifestation, Primordial Substance,
Mohammedan Light, or Mohammedan Reality. (At this stage, the jewel is still
whole, but the possibility of differentiation and multiplicity has arisen, and
micro cracks or fractures in the symmetry have appeared.)

Next, in the Angelic World—the Second
Conditioning or Limitation, the Second Manifestation, also known as the Isthmus
or “Lote-tree of the Boundary.” (Our jewel is still whole, but fissures now
crisscross its surface.)

And finally, in the Kingdom, or world of human
beings. This is the Third Conditioning or Limitation. (At this stage, the jewel
has exploded, bursting and shattering into smithereens and giving rise to the
infinite multiplicity of the observable universe—yet this multiplicity is still
One, although this fact is not evident to our senses. For the fragmentation of
the jewel is illusory. It is only to our fragmented consciousness that it
appears shattered. In reality, even at this instant, it remains in its pristine
unity.)

We can now see that the journey of the seeker
is back to the Source, and that he traverses the ontological stages of Creation
in the reverse order. He travels from multiplicity to unity, and in the end
discovers the true meaning of religion, the mystery of God, and the secret of
man.

Abdulqader Gilani, the Great Helper and diver
into the bottomless Ocean of Unity, explains: “All conduct, states and limits
between the Human and Angelic Worlds belong to the Divine Law (shariah). Those between the Angelic and
Majestic Worlds belong to the spiritual schools or Orders (tariqah: Paths). And those between the Majestic and Divine Worlds
belong to Truth or Reality (haqiqah).”

The
final stage, Knowledge of God (marifah:
Gnosis), corresponds to the Divine World, or Absolute, Undifferentiated Unity,
where knowledge of everything else (multiplicity) is un-learned (the “Cloud of
Unknowing”).

States

The seeker’s state at the beginning of the
journey is inclination to lust and
pleasure. He follows the lead of his selfish and lustful desires. The master’s
instruction and training, however, soon result in the emergence of affection and enthusiasm. This is not
sexual affection, but the pure and unsullied attraction to Truth. This
affection increases and is finally transformed into love. Nothing is possible without love. Love is what delivers
results. It gives rise to attainment
and, when perfect faith has crystallized in the heart, to fulfillment.

The seeker then loses himself utterly (fana: Extinction or Annihilation). Only
God is left, which is why this state is also called Extinction in God (fana fi-Allah). After this point is
reached, certain divine mysteries are revealed to the seeker, who consequently
is thrown into a state of wonder.
Finally comes the state of Survival, Continuation or Subsistence (baqa), whereby the traveller is given a
renewed existence by and through God (baqa
bi-Allah).

Locations

In order to understand locations, we first have
to learn about Subtleties (lataif,
sing. latifah) or psychic centers.

We have already seen that man possesses a
spirit. This spirit is coupled to the physical body in the form of a spiritual body. Now this spiritual body
possesses a psychic anatomy or
structure, just as the material body has a physical anatomy. When Sufis speak
of the Heart, for example, what they have in mind is not the physical lump of
flesh that pumps blood throughout the body. They refer, rather, to the heart of
the spiritual body, which is associated with the spiritual body and animates
the physical body as long as a human being is alive.

In the same way, there are other psychic
centers within the spiritual body akin to the Heart center, and it is to these
that the term ‘Subtleties’ applies.

These psychic centers are variously referred to
as the Five Subtleties, the Seven Subtleties, or the Ten Subtleties. All ten
Subtleties are shown in Figure 1b.

The five basic subtleties are located in the
chest (Sadr). These are: the Heart (Qalb), the Spirit (Ruh), the Secret (Sirr),
the Hidden (Khafi) and the Most
Hidden (Akhfa or Ikhfa).

Figure
1a. The Five Subtleties (lataif ).

In order to obtain the seven subtleties, the
Self (Nafs) is added to the beginning
of this list, and the Human Self (Nafs
al-natiqa, or Speaking/reasoning Self) is added to the end. Sometimes the
Self (Nafs) is omitted, and the Total
(Kull ) is added to give the seven
subtleties.

An intermediate stage called the Secret of the
Secret (Sirr al-Sirr, or S2),
and two further centers beyond the Human Self—the Throne (Kursi), and the Highest Heaven or Empyrean (Arsh)—complete the list of ten subtleties. Occasionally a further
center, the Total (Kull ) or the
Universal Intellect (Aql al-Kull ),
is inserted between the Human Self and the Throne. (This may be considered a
subcenter of the Throne.)

Further information concerning these subtleties
is outlined below. (All measured distances are approximate. The colors and
locations of the centers are sometimes listed differently.)

The Self:
This is the center of the animal (animating) self, and corresponds to the Hara, or Life Center, of the Japanese.
It is located within the body an inch below the navel or belly button.

The
Heart: Also called Fouad, this
does not actually coincide with the physical heart (which is more centrally
placed), but is located an inch below the left nipple. It is associated with
the color red and the prophet Adam, “whom God purified.”

The
Spirit: Its location is an inch below the right nipple. Color: yellow.
Prophet: Noah, “whom God saved.”

The Most
Hidden: Location: top of sternum (just below the neckline). Colorless. In
some charts this is called the Axis of the Secret (Mustawa al-Sirr).

The Human
Self: Location: between the two eyebrows. According to some Sufis, this is
the station of Qaaba Qawsayn, “the
distance—or meeting—of two bows/arcs” (eyebrows) (53:9). Color: ochre.

The Total
and/or the Throne: Location: center
of the forehead. This is where, at a certain stage of development, the famous
“third eye” opens. (Please note, however, that the third eye has nothing to do
with physical anatomy, such as the pineal gland, as Descartes claimed.)

The
Highest Heaven (Empyrean): Located at the crown or topmost point of the
head. Corresponds to the Sahasrara Chakra
(the “thousand-petaled lotus”) in Yoga. (These correlations with other
traditions are mentioned not because the Sufic conception was taken from these
as sources, but in order to highlight the fact that the corresponding realities
have also been recognized in other traditions, since truth is one.) This is
where divine light—called “the most sacred effusion” (fayz al-aqdas) by the Sufis—appears, initially in the form of a
star. This location also corresponds to the juncture of the cranial bones, and
in some traditions has been considered the entry point of the soul into the
body (the bones are not joined in the new-born baby, but close in later on).

Now that we have formed some idea about the
subtleties, how does one utilize this “tree of life”? Basically, the procedure
is to activate the psychic centers in ascending order. One starts by
concentrating on the chest area (Sadr)
as a whole. (Note that its color, blue, is also the color of a healthy psychic
aura.) One then concentrates on the Heart subtlety, and so on in accordance
with the direction of arrows in Figure 1b. Each center is awakened by
concentrating the invocation appropriate to that stage in that center. For
instance, looking at Table 1, Allah
is the invocation proper to the Heart center. Once an invocation becomes fixed
or permanent in its center, and light of a color specific to that center (as
well as certain other signs) becomes manifest, the center is considered to be
‘conquered’ or ‘opened’. One then passes on to concentrating invocation in the next
higher center.

Warning:
Note once again that one must not try to awaken any center without the
permission of a qualified master. This is very dangerous. Do not try to “teach
yourself,” and don’t experiment. Without proper guidance, you’re liable to get
lost in God knows what sector of inner space.

God has stated in a Sacred Tradition: “Know
that there is a [physical] heart in each body. There is a Fouad [spiritual Heart] in each heart. There is a Secret in each
spiritual Heart. There is a Hidden in each Secret, and there is a Most Hidden
in each Hidden. I am in that Most Hidden.”

This “withinness” should not be compared or
confused with physical contiguity. It has no quality and quantity, and is
different from whatever may occur to the mind.

Supports

The entire comport of the seeker from the
beginning right through to the end should lie within the Divine Law, that is,
the prescriptions and restrictions of Islam. At no stage should adherence to
the Sacred Law be abandoned, for it is the basis, the foundation, of all.

Upon his works in accordance with the Holy Law,
the aspirant next builds the knowledge and practices of the spiritual schools.
New restrictions are added upon those of the Divine Law. One passes from
License, where some things are allowed by Holy Law, to Restraint, or further
limitation (compression) of the self. This is followed by Knowledge, which is
the Knowledge of God, i.e. being informed about God. This information and these
practices lead the seeker to Truth. After this he can attain Sainthood, or the
Friendship of God. His next support is the Essence of Divine Law. He does not
remain ignorant of the reasons for the Divine Law, and acts out its
requirements in full knowledge and consciousness of their reason for being.
Finally, his support becomes the Universal Essence.

Figure
1b. The Ten Subtleties (lataif ).

Lights

These are the lights with colors that
distinguish one subtlety from another. This color is blue in the beginning. The
Heart Center glows with a reddish light when it is activated. The color of the
Spirit center is yellow, and so on.

Names

The names define the invocation to be performed
by the seeker at a certain stage. A specific name of God is invoked at each
stage, and the aspirant passes from one to another as he progresses.

Perceptions

These define the perceptual level of a
wayfarer. They are activated only at the last three stages of selfhood. We may
distinguish here between perceptions of Unification (tawhid) and those of Fusion (jam).

Unification of deeds/verbs—of
attributes/adjectives—of Essence

The universe has often been compared to a great
book by the wise. “The book of the universe,” said Galileo, “is written in the
language of mathematics.” One of God’s 99 Beautiful Names, the Counter (or
Reckoner: Muhsi), bears testimony to
the fact that God indeed created in numerical measure and proportion. Wherever
we look in the observable universe, we witness the mathematical beauty that the
Great Artist (Sani) has built into it.

So Galileo was right—but nevertheless,
incomplete. Our modern science, which is quantitative through and through,
gives us only a one-dimensional picture of the universe, that projected upon
the Real-Number Line. Numbers can tell us a lot, but they can’t tell us
everything. It is as if scientists had opened the book of the universe,
encountered letters, words and sentences on each page, then proceeded to
measure the dimensions of characters, their groupings into words, their
frequency and regularity of occurence, etc. This is a very telling metaphor,
for in physics and chemistry the “alphabet” of the universe is composed of the
92 naturally- occuring elements, in biology of 22 amino acids, and so forth.

But because of its exclusive preoccupation with
quantity, modern science has neglected to actually read the Grand Book of the Universe—to read and to understand
it. Our measurements performed on it are unsurpassed, yet our understanding of
it is still insufficient. The secrets it harbors remain as locked as ever, and
it is these we need to decipher.

Now the Sufis, too, have viewed the universe as
a book to be read. In Arabic, fiil
refers both to an action and, linguistically, to a verb; sifat refers both to an attribute and to an adjective, ism both to a name and a noun. Taking
their cue from this, the Sufis have represented the book of the universe as
being composed of verbs, which are God’s actions; adjectives, which are His
attributes; and nouns, which are His names. In their conception, the Essence of
God gives rise to the Divine Names and Attributes, from each of which derive
myriads of Divine Actions, and the universe is scene to the vast and continual
interplay between these elements. Hence to return to the Source, one has to
unify, first, the actions to reach the level of God’s Names and Attributes, and
then to unify these in turn to reach the unity of the Essence. This, in the
Sufic view, is how pure, changeless, infinite Being becomes conditioned or
transformed into continual yet finite Becoming: through the endless interplay
of Names, Attributes and Actions.

We may compare this process to the
differentiation of pure white light into a rainbow of colors when it passes
through a prism, and in this analogy the prism would be comparable to the
“Immutable Entitites” or “Permanent Archetypes” (ayan al-thabita) as the Sufis have termed it. From every Name and
Attribute that has thus been differentiated, myriads of actions are spawned.
Thus, everything in the universe is an intersection or locus of specific Divine
Names, Attributes and Actions. One must reverse this process in order to reach
the Source, which is the Essence of God. The unification of Actions leads to
their origin in a Divine Name or Attribute, and unification of the latter
yields the pure white light of the Essence, which is then seen to stand behind
all the countless manifestations occuring in the universe.

These are states that are achieved only by the
rarest of individuals. They are best understood in terms of Annihilation and
Subsistence. A possible interpretation of the relationship between the stages
of Unification and those of Fusion is given in Figure 2.

Unfortunately, these terms have little meaning for
those who have not experienced these states. As Rumi, the great mystic, said: “Be me, and you will know.”

The Manifestation of Actions,
Names/Atributes, and Essence

The manifestation of actions: An action amongst
the Actions of God is born and manifested in the heart of a servant. An aspect
of the Divine Power flowing through all things becomes manifest in that person.
That servant thus perceives that God is the cause of all motion and change.
Only the possessor of this station knows and understands this.

The manifestation of names: God causes a name
from among His Beautiful Names to be born in the heart of a servant. This
person is so overwhelmed by the divine effulgence that engulfs him through the
power and lights of this name that if that Divine Name were to be called upon
at that instant, he would answer.

The manifestation of attributes: The Lord
manifests one of His Attributes in the heart of his servant. All human
attributes disappear from him, and God appears in his heart in the guise of
that Attribute. For instance, if God appears to him in the Attribute of
Hearing, that person hears and understands the voices and sounds of all beings,
whether animate or inanimate.

The manifestation of the Essence: This is to be
very close to God. By dint of worship, the wayfarer has become adorned with
humility, spiritual poverty, and consciousness of his own weakness. He knows
God through his self and attributes, and knows his self through the Attributes
of God. Because the self of this Perfect Human has found lowliness and
nothingness, the mirror of servanthood stands face to face with the Mirror of
the Divine, and whatever is visible in one is reflected in the other. On this
basis the Lord has declared: “The heavens and the earth cannot contain me, yet
the heart of my faithful servant does.”

All these
details and techniques, however, will be of no avail if the aspirant does not
pay attention to two crucial points: abstention
from illicit gain, and from illicit sex. For all the icy baths of the
Brahmins, the sleepless nights of the Buddhist and Christian ascetics, the
self-inflicted tortures of the Hindu fakirs, the seclusion of Sufi dervishes in
mountain caves or dungeon-like cellars—these all served only one end: the
control of the Self. And yet, self-control is actually predicated on these two
critical points alone: Forbidden passion and pecuniary interest. Protect
yourself from these, and the way to sainthood will remain open. Otherwise, not
only will all your efforts come to naught, but the gates of fire will welcome
you. Here, it is necessary to watch one’s eyes, one’s ears, one’s tongue, and
one’s mind. If at any time you observe a tendency in these to Forbidden
earnings or passions, then the Work—the Struggle—has not been completed.

Provided the two points above are fulfilled,
meditation (tafakkur) and invocation
connecting the heart with the mind—more precisely, the Heart Center with the
Center of the Human Self—will lead to progress on the path, never neglecting
the other requirements, beginning with Prayer.

Above and
beyond all these details lies the progress of the seeker through the levels of
selfhood. The treatment of these levels is important enough to merit a chapter
in its own right.